Dáil debates
Wednesday, 1 November 2006
Private Members' Business
Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2006: Second Stage.
6:00 am
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I wish to share time with Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Ó Caoláin.
Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The right to a roof over one's head is one of the most basic rights a person should have and it is a right Sinn Féin believes is so important that it should be contained in Bunreacht na hÉireann, the Constitution. No family should be forced to wait for periods of up to seven years on a housing list, as is the case in parts of this city. Nobody should be forced to live in substandard rented accommodation for years because of Government neglect. Nobody should be forced to live on the streets because of Government indifference.
After nine years in Government, during a time of unprecedented economic prosperity, the undeniable fact is that the Government and the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Noel Ahern, have failed. The Minister of State knows he has failed; he is acutely conscious of it. However, rather than face the reality, he turns away and pretends, ostrich-like, that if he refuses to acknowledge the existence of a crisis, it will simply cease to exist.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
He will not even come to the House.
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
He hides behind a stream of selectively chosen statistics that I have no doubt he will regurgitate again in this debate. He hopes that if he can throw up enough smoke and dazzle us with enough mirrors, we will believe that a Government, which writes its housing policy at the behest of developers, is interested in creating policy to deliver for people.
No amount of spin will hide the facts. There are 44,000 households on social housing waiting lists. Social housing output as a percentage of overall annual housing output has fallen dramatically in the past four years from around 10% in 2002 to 5.8% in 2005. Less than 5% of the homes completed in the first three months of this year were for local authority tenants. Of the 81,000 houses built last year, only 830 were in the social and affordable sector. With regard to houses which have been built, there has been an 11.9% increase in the price of new houses State-wide and a 14% increase in house prices in the Dublin area. The average price of a house in Dublin in 2005 was €386,089; in 2001, the average price was €252,000. There has been a 17% increase in the price of second-hand homes. The Government is now 15,000 units short of the number of social and affordable housing it made a commitment in the national development plan to deliver by the end of this year. If that is not a crisis, I do not know what is.
The Bill put forward by Sinn Féin sets out a realistic plan to try to help achieve the NESC target of 73,000 extra social housing units by 2012, a target the Government is nowhere near achieving. We want to amend the Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2002 to oblige developers to provide 20% of social and affordable housing and remove the option for developers to make a financial contribution to local authorities in place of providing social and affordable housing units. This will ensure that Part V delivers social and affordable housing in an integrated manner, as originally envisioned.
The decision of the Government in 2002 to abandon any real effort to deliver social and affordable housing has had a dramatic impact across the State. I will give a concrete example — a case study — of one local authority where the impact of Part V since the Government introduced the developer's loophole in 2002 can be clearly observed, using figures I received from my colleague, Councillor Joe Reilly, whom I hope will be able to raise these issues in the House after the next election.
Meath County Council has received financial contributions from builders totalling just under €4.5 million since 2002. The total number of social houses provided in Meath is three, all located in Johnstown in Navan. In terms of affordable housing, 73 units were built. To be fair, it should be noted that, in the six years since Part V was introduced, another 41 houses are "in progress". This is the record of Part V in Meath: 73 affordable units, 41 in progress and a total of three social housing units, or one every two years.
The total number of applicants on Meath County Council's local authority waiting list is 780. Is it in this lifetime or the next that the Minister of State aims to eliminate social housing waiting lists? Does he want it recorded that Fianna Fáil, the party he represents, is more comfortable with a system where developers can get out of their commitments by handing over cash than one that delivers housing for families?
The difficulties do not stop there. The erosion of the social sector means that the private rental sector increasingly acts as a refuge for people on low incomes. In 2005, over 60,000 individuals in the private rented sector were in receipt of rent supplement, representing an annual expenditure of more than €368 million. This means that every day more than €1 million of public money is shovelled into the pockets of private landlords rather than being used to build social housing. This must stop. We need a managed transition away from State subsidy of private tenancy and towards increased public resources for social housing, where tenure is by definition more secure. If Part V were amended to provide social units to those in need of social housing, we would not have to spend €1 million a day of public money on subsidising the private rented sector.
There are huge differences in the quality of houses being rented. At a meeting with the Society of St. Vincent de Paul today, I heard about a house in a neighbouring county where a family is living in rat-infested accommodation which has been condemned three times. This accommodation is being paid for by the taxpayer through rent supplement. It is a disgrace that any family is being asked to live in such conditions.
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a disgrace that it is not only tolerated by the State, but paid for by its taxpayers.
All of this makes the argument that Part V should be returned to its original purpose and the Government's approach to housing should change. People need to be treated on the basis of equality, and parity in housing needs to be the number one goal in housing policy. The policy of mixed tenure development should be to the forefront of any new plans for house building regardless of whether the development is in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown or Tallaght.
Part V can help in the provision of high standard, quality accommodation for some of the 44,000 currently on local authority waiting lists. However, amending Part V is only one step. My colleagues will deal with other measures that need to be addressed.
Every person in Ireland has the right to live in security, peace and dignity, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. Every person has a right to housing, regardless of income or access to economic resources, economic status or group or other affiliation or status, and every person has a right to freedom from discrimination in housing. Sinn Féin is committed to bringing about a progressive improvement in living conditions for lower income people, and to allow for tenure of choice. Sinn Féin aims to end the housing crisis, eliminate homelessness and ensure that adequate and appropriate housing is available and accessible to every person on the island without exception.
It is time to put the needs of families before the needs of developers. It is time to develop a housing policy aimed at delivering social and affordable housing, not one aimed at delivering higher profits for the construction industry. The Bill will give all parties the opportunity to pick a side and take a stand.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Sinn Féin has a realistic alternative vision for housing that is based on our understanding that housing is a human right. Our objective is to establish an equitable, balanced and fairly regulated housing market where the people who rely on housing in the social sector are catered for. Reversing the small gains made in the original Part V in 2002 has done nothing to address the current acute housing crisis that exists in this State.
I noted the comments of the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, this morning when he debated this legislation with my party colleague, Deputy Crowe. The Minister of State claimed it was too early to judge the effect of the changes in Part V, which was introduced in 2002, because it takes five years for the various planning permission requests to work their way through the system. I have no doubt the irony of what he was saying was lost on the Minister of State. Fianna Fáil was happy enough to introduce the change in 2002, less than two years after it was set to deliver. Sinn Féin argued at the time that because of the delays in planning permissions, and the appeal to the Supreme Court against the constitutionality of the legislation, the Government's real motive in introducing the current loophole for developers was to appease the construction lobby. Although we said more time should be given to allow the benefits of Part V to become apparent, the Minister, Deputy Cullen, would have none of it and guillotined the Bill through the House as fast as possible. As my colleague, Deputy Morgan, observed at the time, reading the construction industry's trade publications is as good a guide as any to forthcoming changes in Fianna Fáil policy on housing in particular, and it was clear that the industry wanted Part V changed.
When the construction industry got its changes the ordinary working-class people were affected most by them. Dublin is among the areas most directly affected by the chronic lack of social housing. The housing crisis in Dublin is a direct result of the Government's cosy relationship with its developer and property speculator friends. The dilution of Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000 at the behest of the developers has led to €32 million being paid to local authorities by developers buying their way out of their obligations to provide 20% of social and affordable housing in all housing developments. Meanwhile the housing waiting list has soared with 43,684 families waiting to be housed. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council has received almost €3.5 million, more than any other council in the State from developers buying their way out of their obligations, while the social housing waiting list continues to grow. Some 3,519 families are waiting to be housed by the council. These are disgraceful statistics. Units need to be provided for low-income families and developers buying their way out of providing social housing units is legalised bribery.
In Dublin City Council's area a similar situation exists, with developers trying to wrangle out of even the small obligations they have under the Government's changes. They are forcing the council to go to court to try to compel them to meet those obligations. The situation in Dublin is out of control. Reports over the summer indicated that key public sector workers, such as nurses, fire-fighters and teachers, are being forced out of Dublin and other major cities as they cannot afford to buy a home. Developers feel they are immune from the law and from moral decency, and have been issued a blank cheque by the Government for their actions. If the Government is serious about promoting social inclusion in housing, it is high time the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, stood up to those developers who are buying or bullying their way out of their obligations to provide social and affordable housing.
Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Hear, hear.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
His recent pledge to tackle property speculators has been exposed as nothing but empty rhetoric and that is why Sinn Féin has brought this Bill before the House.
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I understand that other Deputies will follow me. Earlier today when I asked the Taoiseach about the purpose of this Bill, the reinstatement of Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, he claimed the Government changed it because of demands from all sides, including here in the Dáil. Although there was certainly pressure from some on the Government benches, the changes that were introduced in 2002 were strongly opposed in this House, including by Sinn Féin — we were not alone on that occasion. We all know where the pressure came from. It was from the developers and the speculators who contribute so much to the funding of the Minister's party. It was one of the quickest turn-arounds ever for a political lobby.
Let us examine the other side of this. People with disabilities campaigned tirelessly for a rights-based disability Bill. The final Bill was a bitter disappointment to many who had spent a lifetime working and promoting the introduction of rights-based legislation for their loved ones. The Bill they secured in no way reflected the needs of people with disabilities. They were treated differently from the speculators and developers, who lobbied for less than 18 months. For this Government, rights-based legislation was never on the cards for those who needed it, but the Galway tent lobby was acceded to with undue haste.
The Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government has been in power since 1997. Back then the housing crisis was developing and although it was clear what was going to happen as the economy grew, the Government failed to act. The Minister and the Taoiseach failed to act. They placed total reliance for the provision of housing, including social housing, on the private sector. The Government's approach was and is driven by the drive for profits by the land speculators and the developers. This has played into the hands of the lending institutions, which are profiting from the massive scale of mortgages weighing down on young families and — take note — into perpetuity. That is the reality those young families face. We pointed out that at the time and we stated that local authorities must be given a lead role in providing homes for our people, but that was ignored. Local authority housing as a proportion of overall housing supply has fallen to a record low under this Government. This State has one of the lowest outputs of social housing in the European Union, and that is an incontrovertible fact.
The consequences of the housing crisis go far beyond the issue of accommodation. Poor housing is a contributory factor to poor health among sections of our population. The exorbitant price of homes has a knock-on effect for the care of children. It leads to both parents in young families having to work to make ends meet. The pressure on family budgets and on the demand for child care places is enormous. More importantly, the quality of life for children and indeed for parents is adversely affected.
Thousands of social and affordable homes would now be in place if Part V had been left as it was introduced in the Bill in 2000. It can still have that important effect if now reinstated, and that is the challenge we put to the Government tonight. We ask that the Government end the scandal by which a nation with an abundance of wealth sees so many people sleeping rough on our streets or living in overcrowded conditions, for example, with two families sharing accommodation. All their needs should be met and this Bill will go some way to doing that.
I commend the make room campaign which is being spearheaded by Focus Ireland, the Simon Communities of Ireland, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and Threshold. They have said that with strong political leadership, a responsive policy agenda and adequate resources, homelessness could be ended. The target date of 2010 for ending rough sleeping and long-term homelessness has been set by the Government, but that target will not be reached unless the Government prioritises social and affordable housing based on the needs of people.
The make room campaign has stated that in recent years, the profile of homelessness has changed, with fewer people sleeping rough. However, thousands of people remain without a home, many living for years in insecure hostel or emergency and temporary accommodation. They say that turning the corner on homelessness will require much more comprehensive and sustainable housing solutions, and we absolutely endorse the make room campaign view of that. One of the first steps in the solution to homelessness lies in the delivery of a needs assessment. The campaign has identified that as a means of establishing the actual need of each applicant who is identified as homeless or in need of housing, and we support that proposition. Individual solutions can then be developed based on the facts derived from that needs assessment.
The social housing stock in the Twenty-six Counties is inadequate. Let the Minister acknowledge that fact. As we stated previously, much-needed local authority homes have not been delivered. Some 44,000 family units are in need of housing, equivalent to more than 120,000 citizens. That is the issue that needs to be tackled. I am telling the Minister of State not to roll out his statistics this evening or tomorrow. We are tired listening to them from the Minister of State, the Taoiseach and the coalition parties in Government. These statistics mean absolutely nothing to the people who need housing. What we need is action and we are demonstrating that, clearly indicating to the Minister of State one step that can be taken. We urge him to adopt this Bill and make it his own, and we shall gladly applaud him for it.
Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I propose to share time with Deputies Catherine Murphy and McGrath.
It is not often I commend Fianna Fáil, but I praised the former Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Noel Dempsey, when he introduced the Planning and Development Act 2000 because it was both radical and focused. It proposed that developers of land for housing should do one of three things, namely, make homes, houses or apartments available or sites or land available to local authorities. Yet that brave legislation was filleted the moment the former Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, came into office. I firmly believe Deputy Cullen looked the developers in the eye and blinked, because he filleted that legislation.
He introduced two opt-out clauses, to give cash to the local authority or to provide sites elsewhere. That was a retrograde step which is fomenting ghettoisation in housing policy. The one thing we should be doing in an ever-changing Ireland is trying to reduce ghettoisation. We see the Minister of State with responsibility for housing trumpeting the fact he is selling off land and getting sites elsewhere, under the affordable homes initiative. He is selling lands in Dublin 4 and 2 and providing lands somewhere on the periphery of the capital. I do not believe that is a good policy. What he should be doing is counteracting ghettoisation. He should be providing housing units, whether in Nutley Lane, Dublin 4 or beside the canal in Dublin 2. The Minister of State has a great opportunity to reduce ghettoisation and he is not doing enough about it, given the powers he has. The changes which the former Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, introduced were a retrograde step in housing policy, because he let developers off the hook by allowing them to provide cash or sites elsewhere, which add to ghettoisation. As regards the financial contributions, I do not believe many local authorities around the country have used that provision sufficiently.
The Minister of State needs to provide local authorities with the resources to track down the developers. Developers will use every trick in the book to try and wriggle their way out and a very smart law agent is required as well as good people in middle management in local authorities to get Part V delivered on. Local authorities, including in my constituency in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, have lost out on potential contributions by not using the provisions of Part V to the best of their ability. It is no good the Minister of State shedding crocodile tears on the subject. He should be ensuring he is delivering on a commitment to provide affordable homes. In Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown under the 1999 scheme, one unit has been built so far this year according to the figures I have. Under Part V, so far this year 11 units have been built, not something to set the crowds jumping for joy, and under the affordable homes initiative nothing has been built to date. When one tots up everything that has been built in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown under the 1999 scheme, Part V and the affordable housing initiative, it does not amount to 150 housing units.
Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
By any standards that is not a decent accomplishment. I really do not believe the Minister of State is making an impact. Meanwhile, we are finding out that 16% of homes in the country are vacant. The Government is providing tax incentives for holiday homes that remain vacant for 11 months of the year. That is not the way forward in terms of housing policy and the Minister of State should look at the type of incentives being given and reconsider them in order to help the less well-off rather than those who are doing quite well.
In many respects a triple tax incentive is being provided, particularly if one considers the relief available for rental property. Builders construct accommodation for rental purposes. They get tax relief on the cost of the rental units in the first instance. They also get tax relief on the rent received. To add insult to injury they get a third tax relief from the State, namely, a payment under the rental subsidy scheme. While people are living in substandard accommodation and housing lists in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown have trebled over the last ten years, the Minister of State is providing a triple tax relief to some of the wealthiest people on this island. That is not the right type of housing policy. The measure of any social housing policy is how it helps the least well off.
When one looks at the transition for those on rental supplement to the rented accommodation scheme, one finds that when local authority officials inspect the accommodation it simply is not up to scratch. Whether this is due to fire regulations, the lack of hot or cold running water, damp on the walls or whatever, only 10% or 15% of the accommodation vetted under the rental accommodation scheme — I am subject to correction on this — passes muster. The accommodation is not measuring up to the simple basic standards for 2006, a damning indictment of the Minister of State's housing policy.
This is not about general housing, but rather about housing for the least well-off. It is for lone parents trying to bring up a couple of children who are struggling to make ends meet and paying money to landlords day in day out. Even that type of accommodation is simply not meeting the basic standards, and it is the most vulnerable who are suffering, whether parents trying to bring up children on their own, recently arrived immigrants or whoever. Meanwhile three different types of benefit are being handed out to very well off people. They are getting the double rent relief, capital allowances and rental supplement. The well off are doing better out of this and the most vulnerable are suffering.
I commend Sinn Féin for attempting to reinstate Part V of what was well considered legislation. Fianna Fáil has moved to the right, particularly under Deputy Cullen's stewardship. It sees the only way forward as the privatisation of essential State services. I am concerned that the State has an enormously important role to play in providing the basics, whether in health, education, housing or in public transport. The last few years in particular have seen State agencies starved of the essential funding they need and legislation filleted of the intentions that were there in the first instance.
We must also consider the issues raised by the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution and its conclusions as regards housing. It suggested two very simple initiatives. One was that local authorities should be able to purchase land at the existing use value, plus 25%. The other was that we should be taxing the benefits of the increase in value that accrues from rezoning. If one looks at any of the property supplements one can see we are not talking about millions or tens of millions of euro but hundreds of millions of euro in increased value. The lands belonging to Sir Marc Cochrane in Shankill went overnight, by virtue of a stroke of a planner's or a county councillor's pen, from a value of €3 million to €170 million. That is the type of profit being made by those who are inside the tent at the Galway races. The efforts of the Government could be concentrated on a few slight changes that would improve the capacity of the local authority to build homes in the first instance.
Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I wish to share time with Deputies Catherine Murphy and Cowley.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to speak on this new legislation, the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2006. I commend Sinn Féin for bringing the Bill before the House, as housing is a significant issue for most people. It is an issue for our young, our disabled and our elderly.
I also wish to challenge the Government on its record, a disaster for most people. It seems to have decided to side with the developers instead of working people. I am here to demand action for our people, taxpayers and citizens. We need the 20% portion of social and affordable housing as a matter of urgency, a matter with which this Bill deals. I support this progressive legislation, as it gives our people a chance in the housing market.
The Government seems to be obsessed with the market and the economy, while turning its back on our people and citizens. Section 2 amends the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2002 by restoring the original obligations which existed under the Planning and Development Act 2000 on developers to provide 20% of social and affordable housing. It does this by removing the option for developers to make a financial contribution to local authorities in place of providing social and affordable housing.
I urge everyone in this House partaking in the debate to support the rights of the disabled with regard to housing and long-term care in society. They must be a major part of any housing policy. This issue is a major part of my own political agenda. People with disabilities should not only have their proper share of the cake, but they should also run the bakery with regard to housing and long-term care accommodation. They deserve supports, our respect and to be part of this legislation. I urge all Deputies in the House, and the Minister of State in particular, to listen to the voice of the disabled, especially on the issue of housing.
I strongly support the Make Room Campaign, put together by a group of organisations working with the homeless. It is campaigning to ensure people at risk of, or experiencing, homelessness will have their housing and support needs assessed and met. I support the campaign for an annual output of 10,000 new social housing units per year to help to prevent and alleviate homelessness.
We need measures like supported housing, care support and tenancy sustainment programmes to support people who have experienced homelessness. I am calling for changes in the rent supplement scheme so people on low incomes can be given more help with meeting their housing needs. We need new regulations of accommodation in the private rented sector covering basic standards such as safety, the provision of heating and cooking facilities and maintenance. I am also calling for a range of poverty-proofing measures and poverty prevention actions across areas of education, health and services, which could help prevent homelessness in the first instance.
In terms of housing, I urge the Minister of State and all Deputies not to forget our elderly. While maintaining people in their own homes is the preferred option of many of us, other options should be made available to older people to enable them to live in good quality accommodation suited to their needs.
The Government must wake up and increase the provision of supported housing for older people, and it should provide the revenue for appropriate supports and personnel to manage them. The Government should create a dedicated housing advice service for older people to help them manage their limited resources and explore the housing options available, such as home improvements, adaptations or moving to alternative accommodation.
I commend Sinn Féin for this excellent legislation. I urge all Deputies in the House to support it. Housing is a key issue for our people and they deserve our support.
Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and state my support for the Bill.
Kildare is an area where the full 20% portion is included in the housing strategy. It is an area in which whole towns are under construction and there is every conceivable type of housing unit, including apartments, duplexes and triplexes. The whole shebang is under construction at present.
It is an area where there is an expectation, because of the extent of the development, that the housing list would be wiped out if this measure was working the way it is intended to work. However, what we have seen are the crumbs from the table. We have seen a couple of dozen units, at the very most, covering both affordable and social housing.
There is a total lack of transparency around this issue. Those on the waiting list for both social and affordable housing find it impossible to get information about availability, or when different housing will become available within new developments visibly under construction.
Local authorities also seem to have wound down their own direct programmes and they have not been amassing land banks because they were depending on Part V to deliver on the housing programme. It was supposed to be a cure-all. Not only would it deliver on housing, but it would also provide for good integration. Many people welcomed this, including myself.
Land banks which would have been appropriated as part of community gain under development plans, for example, did not come about because developers complained there would be a double take if they had to contribute under Part V as well as community gain. So there has been a loss in more than one respect.
In Kildare, 1,500 families or individuals are on the waiting list. That understates the case, as every day of the week I come across people who have been scratched off the list because they did not complete the assessment last year. A 22-page assessment is pretty daunting for some individuals, and it is part of the reason people have gone off the list. Where land is provided in lieu, the planning and building process must be gone through, which adds to delivery time. Despite the fact that there is a fast-track approach for local authorities, it often takes them an excessively long period to actually deliver the houses.
There is a price in human terms to pay, but there is also an economic price to pay, a point which has already been made. A third of all people in private rented accommodation are being supported by the State. As long as these people are supported by the State, that money will come from taxes. It is an idiotic policy.
Developers are not offering housing units, but apartments. I can see nothing but apartments being offered on social and affordable housing. Although it is very suitable for some family types, it is not suitable for others. Very often in affordable housing, there is a significant amount of cost going towards management companies, etc.
Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is very enlightened Bill. I compliment Sinn Féin on bringing it forward. As far as I can see, action taken by former Deputy Bobby Molloy when he was the Minister of State has been totally destroyed and watered down by the very people who should be upholding what he was trying to do. He was trying to do something very pure and act in a way politics and this House should be doing.
He was trying to ensure that homeless people and people in need would have a house. Unfortunately, his dream was destroyed by the same corruption which is destroying the Government. It is all about money, greed and power. This Bill would address that point. If there is a collection of Independent Deputies after the next general election, they would certainly want to restore Part V in its entirety, and more.
Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Hear, hear.
Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The demand for social housing is bigger than it has ever been in the history of the State, with 48,000 people waiting. People who need housing are being put in a very bad position. We find that the people who have money will make even more money. While private housing is thriving, social housing is in the doldrums. The level of house prices is such that one requires ten times the average industrial wage to get to the entry point for housing. It is the reality of this country at this stage.
We had many ways forward, such as the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. The National Economic and Social Council report is lying there, with its recommendations being ignored. More resources for local authorities and housing associations are required. The private rented housing subsidy of €250 is an open cheque book for private developers. This is on the backs of the homeless and the destitute. More social housing must be targeted at low income households and vulnerable groups such as the elderly, the homeless and the disabled. We have the lowest stock of social housing in Europe, with the exception of poor Luxembourg. This is the state of dear old Ireland in 2006. Where has Fianna Fáil gone? Is it the party that will look after the poor and the vulnerable or is de Valera's dream gone down the Swanee? NESC recommends an increase from 127,000 houses to 200,000. We can now see a new generation of drifters, moving from one private landlord to another.
This country has been asset-stripped of social housing. We need more resources now. Does the Government agree with NESC? If not, it should forget about the council but if the Government agrees, it must do something about the situation. The targets were identified in the National Development Plan 2000-2006 but they have not been met. There is a future but I am not sure the Government is prepared to go down the right road.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I oppose the Bill but wish to clarify the Government's position regarding the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act introduced in 2002 and particularly how it impacted on the provision of social and affordable housing. There has been much misinterpretation of Part V since its introduction. I have arranged for my Department to prepare a short Part V fact sheet which is available in the Oireachtas Library.
It is the view of the majority of observers that Part V is a key measure in providing housing for all the community, especially those in need of social and affordable housing. For the first time it made the community's needs for social and affordable housing a material planning consideration that a local authority is obliged to take into account when preparing its housing strategy, formulating development plan policies and deciding on residential planning applications. Part V places a statutory obligation on local authorities to ensure that sufficient land is zoned for housing in their development plans to meet the projected housing requirements over the period of the plan. A set percentage, up to 20%, of residentially zoned land must be reserved for social and affordable housing.
Each planning authority is required to prepare a housing strategy that covers the period of the development plan. The housing strategy forms an integral part of the development plan and acts as a cornerstone for future housing policy within the functional area of the authority. Local authorities set out the options for compliance with Part V in their housing strategies. Through the 2002 amendment, they are enabled to develop different preferred options. In effect, local authorities determine what they want from developers to meet the need for social and affordable housing in their area.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What the developers want.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The developers may make suggestions but it is the local authorities that decide.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Most of us have been members of local authorities in the not too distant past. If Members of this House feel councillors are not acting on Members' behalf, they can communicate this to them.
Measures to address the housing needs of all sectors of the existing and future population in the area including first-time buyers, the elderly, people with disabilities, students etc. are also in the strategy. The objectives of the development plan on the form, type and positioning of housing are based on detailed local research to ensure that the right units are delivered to the right locations within the functional area of the authority. Each and every applicant for permission for residential development, other than certain exempted residential developments prescribed in legislation, must specify in the planning application how it is proposed to meet the requirements of the housing strategy with regard to the development for which permission is being sought.
The proposed Bill intends to restore the situation we had some years ago. There is nothing innovative in this Bill.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is right. We agree with the Minister of State.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One would think it was a Sinn Féin idea originally. It was very much the idea of this Government.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
You cannibalised it, that is the problem.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Part V is about providing social and affordable housing and is an important mechanism in our approach to meeting the ever-increasing demands for such housing. The question for Government is how best to maximise the delivery of such output. Part V was difficult to implement in the early stages.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No more so than the cannibalised version of the Act.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy Ó Snodaigh was allowed to make his contribution without interruption.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That was because the Minister of State had nothing to say.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It soon became apparent to all that it was not realising its potential. Something had to be done to ensure greater output. Like all new schemes it was slow to get going, but this did not distract from what was obvious to the various stakeholders, namely, that the Part V provisions were inflexible and overly bureaucratic and were not achieving the desired results of improving the supply of social and affordable housing.
Difficulties experienced on small sites and high value sites led to the conclusion that there should be an option for off-site provision or equivalent financial contributions.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was that on Ailesbury Road or Shrewsbury Road?
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There were clear advantages in accepting off-site provision, in cases where one or two social or affordable units would be provided in a very expensive area of a city as opposed to multiple units elsewhere. This was just one of the impediments to achieving maximum output and it could not be ignored. A Government committed to enabling home ownership for as many people as possible could not turn a blind eye to the problem. Consequently, an undertaking to review the Planning and Development Act was included in An Agreed Programme for Government in 2002. The review was to ensure that Part V met its objectives for social and affordable housing.
My Department undertook the review in consultation with a wide range of interested bodies——
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——including local authorities and representatives of the house building industry, professional institutes and voluntary housing providers.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Not the public. There were no representatives of home owners, no public representatives and no community representatives.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy Ó Snodaigh should allow the Minister of State to continue without interruption.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
He is just winding me up.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No one could argue that this group did not represent a broad range of relevant interested parties from whom balanced and practical recommendations for improvement could be expected. The review concluded that greater flexibility in the operation of Part V was required. Measures to achieve this were contained in the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2002 that Deputy Crowe is now proposing to abolish.
The requirement for the provision of social and affordable housing in new developments contained in the original Act has not been deleted or removed. The primary requirement of Part V, which has remained unchanged since its introduction in 2000, is the transfer of land on-site. The transfer of housing units, which is my preferred option and the preference of many local authorities and developers, is one of the options to the transfer of land on-site. We have made it clear to local authorities and developers that we seek housing units.
The 2002 amendment provides additional ways in which applicants for residential planning permission may comply with the requirements of Part V. Instead of reserving land or providing sites to the local authority within the proposed development, applicants can now reach an agreement with the local authority to reserve land or to provide houses or sites at another location, to make a financial contribution that will be used for the provision of social and affordable housing, or to agree to a combination of any of these options. The money collected to date — €38 million — has been ring-fenced for housing.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is not being spent.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has to come in first.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It will come in. It is all ring-fenced for housing, be it affordable or social and will all be used. It is totally protected.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If they ever get it from the companies.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In all cases, where an option is utilised to secure a Part V agreement, the principle of equivalent monetary value must be achieved. The changes, or rather, improvements, introduced following the review of Part V were designed to ensure that more housing is provided under Part V arrangements where it is needed, while at all times ensuring the objective of preventing undue social segregation. I am amazed at comments by earlier speakers about "ghettoisation". Part V is the answer. Twenty or 30 years ago we built massive social housing estates——
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The changes have not affected Ailesbury Road.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——such as those about which we have recently heard in Limerick, where there are between 700 and 1,000 houses. We are spending a couple of hundred million euro a year on regeneration and remedial works trying to put right the problems and mistakes we made 30 years ago.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Government made plenty of those.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Part V is the answer. We no longer build massive estates of 800 houses.
Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State has not been canvassing recently.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We build small integrated estates. That is the aim of Part V. To turn that around and say we have not achieved absolute perfection is nonsense.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Government has achieved perfection for developers.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Developers can now reach an agreement to reserve land, provide houses or sites at another location, make a payment to the local authority which will be used for the provision of social and affordable housing, or agree to a combination of any of these measures. These options help to speed up the process while maintaining the integrity of Part V. They do not let developers off the hook, as some speakers have said.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They do not. Paying in cash is one way for a developer to fulfil his or her legal obligations.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They do not do that in Dublin City Council.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The developer may suggest or ask but the local authority decides.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Developers may delay as they have done.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is the law and the reality. While all of the options give considerable flexibility to planning authorities and developers, the Government's preferred option remains the delivery of housing units, particularly on-site to achieve integrated mixed tenure developments. Evidence since 2002 is that the direct delivery of homes continues to be the main option adopted under Part V arrangements. The Opposition talks as if 50% or 75% of developers were buying their way out.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State should look at the figures in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is not happening. The cash option is used in only a minority of cases, amounting to 13% or 14%.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State should examine what has been delivered.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It appears to the Chair that Deputy Ó Snodaigh wishes to leave the House.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not. I am having good fun arguing with the Minister of State.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I suggest that the Deputy leave voluntarily rather than forcing the Chair to ask him to do so, which is the next action the Chair will take.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
To pretend that if that option did not exist——
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State is provoking me.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the Deputy is being provoked in the House, I suggest he watch the debate in his room.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——it would radically change the situation is nonsense because cash is taken only in approximately 13% of cases. If this Bill aimed to guarantee a greater return from Part V than is being achieved, I might be persuaded to support it but it will not achieve this so the claim is false and hollow. If the Deputies wish to use it as an excuse to have a general discussion on housing that is fine, and maybe that is what we are doing, but let us not pretend that the Bill would significantly increase the output of social housing.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is one small part of the Bill.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The proposed Bill seeks "to restore [the position] in relation to the provision of social and affordable housing, which existed under Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000 prior to the amendment of that Act in 2002".
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It refers only to that part of the Bill.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If I read that correctly, it means going back to the original rigid format of the provision of a portion of the land on-site or, with the developer's agreement, the transfer of units or sites on the land that is the subject of the planning application.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Fair dues to the Minister of State.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What will that achieve?
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It will do what it says on the pack.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would not provide more units.
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would provide social integration.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would result in greater rigidity, drawn-out negotiations, more appeals and arbitration and fewer units. While I appreciate fully the intentions of the proposed Bill, it is flawed and would not achieve what it sets out to do.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State never gave it a chance to work.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We tried that before and changed the system because we saw what would happen. We have introduced some flexibility to the situation. That is warranted and necessary in a portion of developments.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State gave it no chance to work. He cut it off.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy Crowe's intention is no doubt to increase output from Part V and substantially increase the delivery of units. With respect, however, this is not the way to ensure that Part V reaches optimum delivery. The Bill aims to achieve this by reverting to a framework clearly identified as inflexible and a hindrance to optimum delivery. While I do not believe this is what is intended, I am under no illusion that this is exactly what would happen if this Bill were passed.
Some people believe that the introduction of the additional options contained in the 2002 amendment have somehow watered down or diminished the effectiveness of Part V. I have already referred to the phrase "letting developers off the hook". No one has been let off any hook. Nothing has been watered down; if anything, Part V has been strengthened. The additional options provided to secure Part V agreements are not a let-off, or a get out of jail free card, as some have suggested, or an escape from responsibility.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State would not get them into jail in the first place.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One of the most sustained criticisms of the options under Part V relates to the making of a financial contribution by the developer. While some media and other commentators characterise the cash option as a widespread phenomenon of "developers buying their way out of Part V", this is simply not true. The delivery of units, sites and land for development of social and affordable housing represents most Part V agreements.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is being used in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would be used there because, sadly, many of the houses in that area cost between €700,000 and €900,000. Even subsidising those by €50,000 or €100,000 does not make them affordable.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is not the social incubation the Minister of State mentioned earlier.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The question is whether the local authority can dictate to, or work with, a developer to provide the type of houses we need. The local authorities may need to be more proactive. Maybe until now they have been sitting back dealing with planning applications as they come in but if a developer sends in an application for 100 five-bedroom houses to sell at €1.2 million, there is nothing one can do to make them affordable.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Make them social housing.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It might appeal to the Deputy's ideology to blow his trumpet and say he got a €1.2 million house for social housing. I would rather get eight or ten houses somewhere else at €300,000 each to take eight people off the list.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State is not getting the houses.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a matter of reality over ideology.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a matter of solving the problem.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
While a financial contribution is a legitimate option, it is a matter for the local authority to accept or reject the offer, having regard to its housing strategy and whether it constitutes the best use of the resources available to it. The developer may propose, but it is the local authority which decides. When doing so it is bound to consider what is statutorily laid down and the best way of meeting the requirements identified in its housing strategy. That point must be clear. The developers do not decide. The developers may offer cash or land or houses elsewhere, but the local authority makes the decision. A cash contribution is in lieu of a percentage of the land that is subject to the planning application and not in lieu of housing units.
There were two main policy motives behind Part V of the Act, to increase the supply of sites for social and affordable housing and to have a good distribution of sites for social integration. Part V is beginning to deliver on its promise. Up to end of June 2006, 2,787 homes were acquired under Part V, while 3,801 dwellings were under construction and a further 4,109 were planned on foot of agreements with developers. Some 51 land transfers to local authorities have been completed involving 40 hectares and a further 259 partially or fully serviced sites have been transferred to local authorities and voluntary housing bodies. Up to €38 million has been received in lieu of lands. Proposals to develop the lands and spend the moneys received are in train in many local authorities. This will deliver many more houses. Even at a low density of 25 units per hectare, these sites and lands will result in additional output of 1,000 units on the land transferred. I hope the local authorities will come forward quickly with their plans to build social housing on these lands.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was disappointed when two Members claimed local authorities are depending on Part V and not pushing traditional local authority housing programmes. On several occasions I have made it clear to local authorities not to rely on Part V. Up to €980 million was allocated to the standard local authority housing programmes. The number of social housing units built last year was the highest in 20 years.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are not delivering. Ours is the lowest percentage in Europe.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy can talk about percentages but he is only fooling himself. It is up to the local authorities to use these moneys. Members will be surprised by the amount of time the Department spends on driving housing associations and local authorities to introduce their plans and draw down the funds. Some years ago it was the opposite. The €38 million is ring-fenced and it will be used.
This output clearly reflects the use of the various flexible options now available to satisfy Part V obligations. Without fear of contradiction, had we not introduced flexibility by increasing the options available we simply would not have attained the numbers delivered and future output would have been bleak.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Government will not allow the benefits achieved under Part V to be undermined in any way.
It is important to stress that not all housing output in the State is subject to Part V. Regularly, the mistake is made that in viewing output under Part V one simply applies a percentage to the total overall housing output to determine the Part V contribution. This is not the case. The misreading of the matter has led many to jump to erroneous conclusions and wild pronouncements about what Part V should be achieving.
Part V is restricted to multiple housing developments on land zoned for residential use, or a mixture of residential and other uses. The bulk of all housing developments, therefore, are not subject to Part V. It does not apply to planning permissions granted prior to the introduction of Part V, many of which developments have been built in the past several years nor to planning applications on unzoned land or to developments of four units or less. Normal planning permission is valid for five years. Some large estates in large urban areas have seven and ten year planning permissions. It will take time for some of these old planning permissions to work through the system. As the new planning permissions are coming in, Part V will be a significant take from those developments.
Members on the other side of the House are twisting statistics, talking about the percentage of overall development. The number of social housing units built last year was the highest for 20 years.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is because of the disgracefully low output for the past 20 years.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They can play around with percentages.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Statistics do not lie.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Just because overall housing output has grown, it should not be used as an excuse to belittle what we are achieving in social unit output. An extra €100 million was allocated to social housing programmes this year. The Department has been pushing local authorities to use it.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many social housing units have been closed? Up to 400 homes in Fatima Mansions were closed.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Another Member was giving out about hovels. If that is the Deputy's idea——
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
These were replaced with only 150 homes. That is a loss of 250 social housing units.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Fatima Mansions renewal project gave people proper living conditions.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was the same with St. Teresa's Gardens and Swan's Nest.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Members opposite referred to the average price of a house. Some of the exercises conducted by financial institutions, such as Halifax, on house prices are meaningless. The average price of a Dublin house is largely made up by the prices of houses in the leafy suburbs of the south side of the city. The first-time buyer is not buying in these areas. These exercises conducted by financial institutions are stupid. They do not achieve anything other than getting publicity. We know the average price paid by a first-time buyer.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How much is it?
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Those are the relevant statistics. Spending on housing under the national development plan is ahead of what was forecast. I accept output is somewhat down but the spending has been ahead of schedule.
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many shared ownerships have there been?
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is the Minister considering the average income and how realistic it is to house prices?
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A Sinn Féin Deputy claims Meath County Council will not push for Part V housing. If that is the case, he should talk to his councillors there. The council chamber is where that argument must be fought.
There are 43,000 families on the housing waiting list.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
By the last needs assessment that figure was down 10% over three years.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Some 40% of those on the list are single. Some 15 years ago, they would not have been eligible to apply. Now one can apply for local authority housing no matter what age one is.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is the Minister claiming single people do not deserve social housing? That is discriminatory.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Up until recently only families or senior citizens could apply.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Many of those single people on the waiting lists are older people.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Many of them are separated. It is not true to claim there are 120,000 people on the housing waiting list.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Nearly 35,000 children are on the housing waiting list. Does the Minister want to discuss that?
Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When will the Minister end the waiting list?
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This year, the budget for social and affordable housing stood at €2 billion. The local authority programme is the largest part of this. There are also the regeneration, remedial works and voluntary housing schemes. Our problem is in spending this funding. That is available if the local authorities bring forward plans based on acquired lands or proposed land purchases.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How can they buy land when the Government sells its properties to the highest bidder? What about Clancy Barracks? Dublin City Council bid for it but the Government would not give it to it. Shanganagh Castle was sold to the highest bidder.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am familiar with a particular tract of land on the north side of Dublin city. I believe a Sinn Féin councillor supported its sale. Many people pretend to take one position but when it comes to the crunch, they change their minds. As the old planning permissions phase out, Part V will deliver.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What about Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council?
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What about Meath County Council?
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This Bill will simply create an overly bureaucratic arrangement. The flexibility of cash is necessary in a small number of cases where one is dealing with exclusive and well-to-do areas.
Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is a real Fianna Fáil trait.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is no point in buying social housing units at €1.2 million. In such cases, it is better to take the cash and use it elsewhere for social or affordable units. That is what we are doing. The €36 million we have received, and any other money that comes in later, will be ring-fenced for social and affordable housing. Sinn Féin proposes nothing substantial in this Bill and I cannot support it. It merely provides for a debate and allows us to talk about this for two days.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I propose to share time with Deputies O'Dowd and Naughten.
Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am astonished at the Minister of State's speech. He did his best to deliver it in a manner to prove that everything is in order, but that is far from the case. It was difficult to resist interrupting him but I managed it.
Ireland is in the midst of a housing crisis. Official statistics for 2006 indicate first-time buyers are paying, on average, more than €250,000 for their first home, some of which are apartments. More than 100,000 individuals are waiting for local authority houses. Despite a Government promise to assist the voluntary housing sector to achieve the target of 4,000 accommodation units per annum, as envisaged under the national development plan, only 600 voluntary housing units were completed in the first half of this year. There are enough homeless people to fill the Point Depot.
In putting forward this Bill, the Sinn Féin Party is proposing something that will benefit communities instead of destroying them. It is clear that the easy option of accepting money in lieu of social housing units has become too common. The figures speak for themselves. According to the Department's housing statistics bulletin, 43,899 units were completed nationally in the first six months of 2006. In the same period, however, only 616 units of social and affordable housing were provided under Part V of the Planning and Development Acts 2000-2006. Instead of 20%, only 1.4% of new builds were social and affordable units. If the local authorities are being given land or money in lieu of providing such housing——
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I explained all this. Deputy McCormack was not listening.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I did not interrupt the Minister of State and I ask him not to get excited. If the local authorities are receiving money or land in lieu, how is it that only 1.4% of completed units are for social and affordable housing?
It is obvious that while there is private success, there is gross public failure. This Bill would go some way towards correcting that failure. Developers, because of the nature of their business, are in regular contact with personnel in planning offices. Developers and their professional advisers are shrewd people and are working to high stakes in this business. They are sometimes able to enter into arrangements with the planning office to enable them — legitimately, under the 2002 Act — to avoid having to set aside 20% of their developments for social and affordable housing, as provided for in the Government's original legislation. This Bill simply seeks to have the Government restore the 2000 Act as it was originally introduced.
Builders realise that giving over 20% of units in a development in a highly sought after area to social and affordable housing will reduce the price they will get for the other units. The result of the opt-out clause in the 2002 Act is that house prices are kept artificially high by buyers, who wish to live where there is no social and affordable housing. This clause also defeats the Government's stated objective of facilitating a social mix in communities. It continues to be the case that social and affording houses are built only in certain areas.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One can only wonder why Fine Gael did not support the 2000 Act, which Deputy McCormack professes to find so wonderful.
Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There may be some short-term gain for the Government in taking such a populist approach but it is poor policy in the long term. The Government, however, seems unconcerned about the long-term consequences.
It is incredible that under the 2002 Act, a local authority can take land in any area under its jurisdiction in lieu of the provision of 20% of units in a new development for social and affordable housing. In County Galway, for example, the developers of new schemes in Oranmore and other places have reached agreement with the local authority to provide land in places such as Headford or Glenamaddy, 30, 40 or 50 miles from the prime residential areas close to Galway city. This is a ridiculous situation. People who avail of social and affordable housing and work in Galway city spend hours travelling to and from their homes in Headford, Glenamaddy or Williamstown or wherever else the developer can secure agreement from the local authority to give land in lieu of setting aside 20% of units in their developments in the much sought after areas.
Fine Gael remains concerned at the lack of protection awarded to residents and tenants and has published three Private Members' Bills on the subject. Each of them was rejected by the Government but we pledge once again to implement them if elected to Government. The Housing (Staged Payments) Bill 2006 is designed to eliminate the practice of customers being forced to make staged payments for houses in estates throughout the State. This practice, which is estimated to cost consumers up to €175 million per annum, is a blatant anti-consumer activity which fundamentally undermines and weakens the position of consumers purchasing homes.
The Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2006 is designed to end the scourge of unfinished housing estates by ensuring developers who did not live up to their responsibilities in regard to a previous development will not receive permission for any future developments.
The Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Bill 2006 allows for the regulation of management companies and their agents in face of reports that new home owners are faced with poorly maintained communal areas, inadequate provision for sinking funds and a total lack of transparency in regard to how rapidly rising management fees are spent. In Galway city and county, developers are obliged under a condition of their planning permission to establish management companies in housing estates comprising only houses as well as those which include apartments. This was never meant to be the case.
The building company is now setting up the management company and the two are one and the same. Householders are being penalised for services that should be provided by the local authority. I do not pay management company fees in the estate in which I live in Galway city. However, my neighbours across the road in Roscam pay exorbitant fees to live in exactly the same type of estate. Many of them are young people in their first homes. The Government is doing nothing to help such people.
I am absolutely astonished at the farce that was the Minister of State's speech. It is no wonder he was interrupted so often by the proposers of this Bill. I hope he does not stand by what he said.
Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This Bill will restore the status quo as set out in the original 2000 Act. The key issue for the public is that we are in the midst of a significant housing crisis. This is particularly difficult for some categories of people, such as first-time buyers and separated people in dire need of decent accommodation. I listened to the Minister of State's speech with interest but heard no mention of the rental allowance scheme, RAS, which was trumpeted with so much fanfare by him and his Department.
The reality is that it is the Government's policy to provide long-term rented accommodation rather than social housing, contrary to the policies of all Governments since the foundation of the State. The Minister of State's view is that the RAS will meet the long-term needs of those in need of social and affordable housing. This is unacceptable to those people and to the public in general. He has millions of euro which he has failed to spend. The Minister of State is quite right — he has not been able to spend this money because he is not giving local authorities that wish to use the rental accommodation scheme to put people into long-term accommodation which it may have found or sourced for them in places like Drogheda and other areas. He will not allow them to pay the rents asked. Last year of the €16 million available, he spent approximately €6 million. I do not have the picture for this year but I am sure it is every bit as bad. The Minister of State is failing to look after single people and those who might be starting off their family lives before they buy their own homes. His policy is an absolute failure.
The Government also baulked at affordable housing. The Fianna Fáil tent at the Galway races is so full of developers, it is afraid to stand up to them. It changed the legislation because the builders said it was not popular with them. Fianna Fáil took on board their views, watered down the Act and made it easier for them to get out of their responsibility, that is, the social responsibility of mixed housing, where social, affordable and other housing are mixed.
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy's party fought against it.
Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is what Fianna Fáil baulked at. It did not insist on that housing mix. It listened to the builders and gave them the option——
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy is now trying to get back to a situation which he fought against when we brought in this provision. There is no logic to the Deputy's case.
Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is much logic to what I am saying now because it is based on fact. Fianna Fáil bowed its head to the builders in its tent at the Galway races. The Minister of State can dress it up any way he likes but that is the truth and the Government is not delivering. No matter what argument the Government puts forward, it is not meeting the housing needs of people.
The Minister of State spoke about affordable housing in Dublin. He should tell me where it is and who is buying it. People from his constituency are living in Louth, Meath, Kildare and Portlaoise, and are moving out of Dublin city. The Minister of State is making it impossible for a generation of young people in Dublin to live in and buy an affordable house in the city. It is not happening under his regime because the Minister of State is not doing his job. People are moving out of the city. Young people are spending long hours commuting because they have not been provided with a public transport network. They are unable to live a decent, normal life. They work 12 to 13 hours per day and never see their families. One case study done in County Meath showed that young parents do not have quality time with their very young children. That is the type of society the Government is building and it is not acceptable to us.
The Government has refused to make its spatial strategy work. It is building everything around Dublin. It does not have a strategy to deal with moving population and jobs out of the main city, Dublin, to the provinces and the west to build up Limerick, Cork, Waterford and other places. The Government is an absolute failure.
What is working in the heart of Dublin city is the Dublin Docklands Authority. It has a very effective housing policy which the Government does not have. It has social, affordable and private housing in the same blocks and everybody is happy with it because it is being properly managed. Fears some people might have of a dysfunctional family or a family involved in drugs in their apartment block are being dealt with radically and properly. If people misbehave, their lease is taken from them and they are not allowed to continue to live in the block. If we are to have a true social mix, we need proper social management and people who may be dysfunctional or anti-social must be dealt with properly. That is how it should be done and not the Fianna Fáil way of saying "yes" to builders in the tent at the Galway races.
What is wrong with the Government is that it is not capable of standing up to the vested interests. By not doing so, it is failing in its duty of care to provide proper, affordable and decent housing for people. It demonstrates a lack of nerve and commitment. Despite all the talk opposite about socialism and change, the way the Government treats young people who cannot buy homes and the elderly in nursing homes, some of whom have experienced appalling cases of neglect under the Government's watch, shows that it is in the hands of developers and is not thinking of the needs of the people, which are not being met. That is where the Government is failing.
Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I wish to raise a number of specific issues, the first being the affordable housing scheme. As the Minister of State knows, the affordable housing scheme is aimed at supplying affordable housing through local authorities. It has been successful in some parts of the country where it has been taken up but in other parts, there is not a huge demand for the scheme. The scheme is basically targeted at low to middle income couples and primarily first-time buyers.
There is a specific problem in County Roscommon in regard to low cost or affordable sites. A scheme was promoted to try to give young couples the opportunity to build their own homes on a developed site at a relatively low cost. The difficulty is that while the affordable housing scheme has statutory backing, there is no statutory basis for the affordable site scheme. There is a new housing estate in Roscommon town which is half built. Some young couples were fortunate enough to get in early and have their houses completed but others who had some capital available built their houses to roof level where they remain. Other young couples who purchased, or who are in the process of purchasing, the site from the local authority cannot get started. The local authority made a condition that they must have provisional approval from a bank or building society to get the site but the banks will not allow the couples to draw down the mortgages. While the provision of affordable sites in towns such as Castlerea, Ballaghaderreen, Boyle and Roscommon town——
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
To which bank did they go?
Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They went to all the lending institutions, none of which will approve mortgages for any of the couples for an affordable site. The lending institutions have stated that there is no statutory basis for affordable sites. The local authority has gone out of its way and has waived its charge in regard to the recoupment of moneys should the site or property be sold on within a 20-year period. It has agreed to deeds of postponement, yet the banks have not found these acceptable. I ask the Minister of State to resolve this issue which probably requires amendment of the primary legislation. It is causing considerable financial difficulties for many young couples in County Roscommon.
I do not believe this anomaly has arisen in any other local authority area. It did not arise in County Roscommon until now but for some unknown reason, the lending institutions are not prepared to provide mortgages. As I said, there are instances of houses built to roof level, yet people cannot draw down mortgages. Much capital is tied up——
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It should not have happened with all the financial institutions.
Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has happened with all the financial institutions. They have all refused to provide mortgages. Once one made the decision, they all backed it up. They cannot give a reason but because one lending institution refused to provide mortgages, they have all refused.
I wish to bring to the Minister of State's attention the issue of anti-social behaviour, particularly in regard to voluntary housing associations. While local authorities have strong powers under section 62 of the Housing Act 1966, that same provision does not apply to voluntary housing associations. The 1997 Act included anti-social behaviour under exclusion orders but for such an order to proceed, it must go through the courts system. It must be evidence based and proof must be provided. Under the 1997 legislation, the judge has the discretion as to whether to enforce the exclusion order. Under the 1966 Act, that was not required in regard to a local authority.
I have come across a couple of instances in the case of voluntary housing associations where there are huge problems of anti-social behaviour among two tenants. However, the locals and residents are afraid to provide the evidence in case of victimisation. I ask the Minister of State to examine the legislation in that regard.