Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I see. Maybe the Minister could address the point I am making, which is that the Central Bank at that time was extremely prudent and this was one of the main justifications for this scheme. The Central Bank no longer advises prudence but says one can borrow up to four times, yet we are extending this. When we are extending it, we are saying it had "two key objectives", namely, "to increase supply" and "to improve affordability". It did neither, mind you. The summary states "The rationale for introducing [the] scheme [was] that [it] would boost demand", some latent demand that was not spelled out. It goes on to give the finding that "The scheme promotes demand for new housing in a market where the problems that exist are unequivocally supply constraints." It continues:

There were also concerns expressed when it was introduced that it can be difficult to remove schemes such as this once they have become [embedded]. This has clearly been the case [because it has] been extended a number of times ... This was not foreseen in appraisals of the scheme previously undertaken.

We do not have financial expertise here and have to use whatever wit we have to read these reports. Here we have a complete failure to analyse this scheme at the time and make proper predictions. The summary continues, "Expenditure on the scheme has far surpassed projected values and is rising rapidly." As I understand, it would be over €1 billion at the extension time, and possibly more. The report states, "This trend appears likely to continue and may accelerate." It is extremely relevant that it states "The scheme is poorly targeted with respect to incomes, location, house prices and other socioeconomic factors ... it has socially regressive impacts, there is a considerable deadweight associated with the expenditure, and it is poorly aligned with spatial policy." The Green Party might listen to that point of being "poorly aligned with spatial policy'" and so on.

I am grateful for the time I have had that allowed me to do that because I have wanted to do it for some time. I advise all Deputies to read it. The summary continues:

The issues that were to be addressed, including the shortage of housing output and affordability ... have intensified since it was introduced with increasing deficits and higher prices [and so on]. ... The research indicates that many of the risks that were perceived... have not come to pass.

The conclusion states, "There are weaknesses in the Help to Buy Scheme and it cannot be concluded that it is sufficiently efficient to represent good value for money." That is some understatement, after that report. After reading out all of that, that is the strongest that Mazars can come up with. The final part I will read out states, "A rational approach would not design the scheme as it currently exists".

That is the report on the help-to-buy scheme that the Minister held onto for a few months. He has not told us its cost. He published it on the day of the budget when we had little chance to read it. I tried to read it quickly that day and have read it since. All the reports to date have said it was poorly targeted. The jury is out on whether it led to an increase in prices but that is because the market was rising so much anyway.

That is one scheme this Bill is copper-fastening for another two years without any logic behind it except it is now too big to fail, a phrase which resonates with me from the banks. The scheme is now embedded. It is not a rational or good one but it is embedded in Government policies. There is the key: Government policy, which is to feed the market at all times rather than to provide public housing on public land. We have this help-to-buy scheme, HAP, RAS, long-term leasing and all the other schemes and all the time in Galway, we have a task force that has sat for three years and should be abandoned. I was thrilled when it came to look at the housing crisis in Galway.

We have no overall vision and no city architect. We have lands in the docks that are being dealt with by a company to maximise the price for the sale of lands there for housing that should be public housing on public land. It is the exact same across the city and a mantra that this is good.

I will finish. I will not go over my time. I have a great difficulty with the cognitive dissonance that happens all the time between something that is said and something that is not done.

See this speech in context