Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank People Before Profit-Solidarity for the detailed motion. I have a difficulty with one issue, relating to the six months and the taking-over of houses, which I think needs a lot more thrashing out, but on a general level I support the motion. The five-page response from the Government is nothing short of shocking. When we look at the background to the motion and to the housing crisis, we have normalised homelessness. When I go back to my hotel at night, I walk past people in the street and ask myself what I have become. What have people become who are sitting there on one side of the little divide, having a drink and something to eat, while on the other side there is somebody on the ground in a sleeping bag? What has happened to me as a human being and what has happened to those people? That is something I have to fight with myself. Nevertheless, in regard to Government policy, I have had the privilege, or the torture, or being a representative for a long time. Over that time, I have watched the results of Government policy intensifying the housing crisis over and over. We on this side of the House have repeatedly begged and appealed to the Government to call it a crisis and begin to deal with that, and that has not happened.

And so we are here today with a five-page response from the Government that does not put anything in context. It does not deal with the gracious motion from People Before Profit-Solidarity that notes the background to it and highlights the positive aspect of the eviction legislation that is planned, even though it came only after sustained pressure. The homelessness figures are 10,805, including 3,220 children. As I have reiterated ad nauseam, surely there is something wrong with our policy when that is the level of visible homelessness we know about, not counting the hidden homelessness. The question is what is wrong. I go back to my experience as a councillor. We stopped building public housing well before the war in Ukraine and the illegal invasion by Russia. We stopped building houses in 2009, and then we copper-fastened that policy by saying the only game in town was the housing assistance payment, HAP, and people were taken off the waiting list. Much of our energy and time as councillors was spent arguing with officials about whether people were on or off the list. I was told I was telling lies, and I recall pointing out at the time that I was a lawyer, not a liar, although there is often a shady area between the two and I will be the first to say that. That was the level of the engagement, rather than deciding that HAP would be the only game in town and that people would be taken off the list.

That was to be a temporary solution, although that is not what the legislation said. It said a person was adequately housed if he or she was in a HAP apartment. Some Opposition Deputies now who are behind that, along with Government Deputies, say it was never meant to be permanent but it absolutely was, and HAP is a fundamental part of the problem. I ask the Minister please not to stand up and tell me he cannot get rid of HAP overnight – obviously, he cannot - but he has to acknowledge that the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government went down that road and the Minister is now in a position to make an announcement stating that this is not the correct way and that we need to phase it out and build public housing on public land.

The snobbery and duplicity that is inherent in the talk about balancing communities is simply unacceptable. I go back to the city council when its representatives were here reporting to the committee. Let me just stay with Galway. We have land in the docks run by a company on behalf of the people of Galway that is entirely answerable to itself, even though it is technically or theoretically owned by the city council. Why that public land is not simply being used for public housing is beyond my comprehension. I am told there is engagement with the Land Development Agency, LDA. This should be public land for public housing. We have land at Sandy Road. It is public land and should be for public housing. We have lots of other land although the council is now telling us there is no more land, but it has identified those sites. If the Minister wants to make a difference, he should make an announcement that public land is for public housing. Then, he should ask the LDA to give him a copy of the audit of all public land in the country. the agency was supposed to have carried out that audit years ago but we are still waiting for it.

The background of the Simon Community report is worth looking at. It does a snapshot every quarter of 16 study areas over three days. This is its 27th snapshot. It is worth looking at. These are not my words. There are no properties available in Galway city or the suburbs under any part of HAP or discretionary HAP. There are no properties available whatsoever. There has been a consistent rise in rents, which have gone off the deep end. The latter is the case and yet we persist with a housing policy that is fundamentally flawed, notwithstanding the good parts the Minister zones in on sometimes.

Let me look at the Mazars report. I read this into the record last night in the context of the help-to-buy scheme. I only mention it again today because when the Minister of State was in the Chamber, he referred to this as a good. On public money, Mazars tells us:

The scheme is poorly targeted with respect to incomes, location, house prices and ... socioeconomic factors. As a result, it ... [is] socially regressive ... [it has] considerable deadweight ... and it is poorly aligned with spatial policy.

The report suggests that if we were to start now, it would not be a rational way to do things. It is utterly condemnatory of the scheme. More than one third of people already had the deposit; they did not need any help. What we have done is help people buy houses costing up to €500,000. That is what the scheme is doing. Consultants and various professionals, some of whom are in my own family, avail of the schemes, and fair play to them. The problem is that the Government policy is a dead weight. Does the Minister know what Mazars said? Scrap it, but do not scrap it now. It is like the prayer to God that goes: "Forgive me for sinning. I am going to change, but just not now."

Mazars tells us that this is a terrible scheme but not to change it now. Why does it say that? Because it has become embedded in Government policy. What is Government policy? Feed the market on every single level across HAP, RAS and long-term leasing. The Minister is shaking his head but the facts are there for him to see. If a communication was issued to the markets to the effect that a home is sacred and is the most fundamental essential in a democracy for security, then the Minister would be sending a message. Prices would have to come down and the Government would be right there in the middle of the market providing public housing. We have to change the income limits. All that has to be done.

I live in Galway city. We cannot even meet the officials there. Can the Minister imagine that? Since the advent of Covid, we have to do everything by e-mail. Covid has been a great excuse. At one time, you could go with an applicant, reassure them and say, "Do your time and you will eventually get a house". That is gone by the board. Now, people are told to go on the choice-based letting scheme. Can you imagine telling someone in their 60s or 70s to go online, on a computer they have not got a clue about, and opt for choice-based letting? They are on the list and have been since 2007. I checked before I came here. Surely, the homeless figures and the fact that no properties are available would tell the Minister that something is seriously wrong with the housing policy.

See this speech in context