Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

9. To ask the Minister for Defence the action his Department is taking to address the plight of overholders in military residences in the Curragh; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25805/14]

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This question returns to the issue raised earlier by Deputy Clare Daly on the plight of Army overholders and the responsibility of the Department of Defence as a landlord. This is an issue that has gone for many years. It probably was an issue when you were in the Department yourself, a Cheann Comhairle. While the response to Minister Daly-----

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are not in government yet.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----I mean Deputy Clare Daly. While the response on this matter earlier was not positive, we would like to hear what the Minister has to say on the matter again.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Fearghaíl has raised this matter concerning overholders in the Curragh Camp with me before.

Under Defence Forces regulations, personnel are obliged to vacate married quarters within a specified period of being discharged from the Permanent Defence Force. The term overholder is used to describe former members of the Defence Forces and their families who have refused to leave military married quarters within 21 days of retiring or resigning from military service. Currently, there are 28 overholders remaining at the Curragh Camp which represents a small number of those who over the years occupied married quarters but who vacated the properties on retirement or resignation from the Defence Forces, as they are required to do. Some ten of the present group of overholders do not pay charges in respect of their use of the property including for the use of electricity. As a result of the Department’s actions since January 2013, 12 of the properties which were being overheld in the area of the Curragh Camp have been returned by the occupants.

The situation of overholders continuing to occupy married quarters is no longer sustainable and measures to resolve this continue to be progressed. My Department is, therefore, in accordance with normal procedures, seeking vacant possession of married quarters which are being overheld and will continue to do so until the overholding issue is resolved.

Of the remaining overholding cases at the camp, the Department is aware a small number of occupants may be particularly vulnerable due to their personal circumstances. In light of this, the Department has been examining what assistance it might provide to bring about a resolution to their status as overholders.

It is important to remember, however, that the Department of Defence does not have a role in the provision of housing accommodation for the public. It cannot provide housing for people who have no entitlement to such from the public purse and who may well have the means to supply housing for themselves.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The former Minister for Defence was not noted for his softly-softly approach to issues. Accordingly, I am disappointed the Minister of State seems to be adopting a more hard-line approach and rejecting some of the progress achieved by people such as Deputy Clare Daly in raising this matter.

In the course of the past month, I was struck by the plight of a family of a serving member of the Defence Forces whose wife approached me on such a matter. They had lived in Army accommodation for many years and he had over 20 years of service. They had cause to leave their Army accommodation because they had raised serious concerns with the Department of Defence about the quality of it. They had gone into private rented accommodation but it was then offered for sale, meaning they found themselves almost on the verge of homelessness with two young children about to undertake State examinations. When they went to their local authority, they were told there was nothing it could for them because they were not on its housing list. Instead, they were informed they were the responsibility of the Department of Defence.

The Department has allowed this family become homeless. It has failed to step in and come to their aid at a time when it had accommodation that could have been made available to them.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is important to remember the Department of Defence does not have any role in the provision of housing accommodation for the general public and cannot provide housing for people who have no entitlement to such from the public purse. People are under no illusion that when they retire from the Defence Forces that they must give up their accommodation as well. They understand they are given accommodation for the duration of their service in the Defence Forces. I feel sad for any family that has to vacate a property because of this rule but they can be under no illusion that this would be the case when taking up such a tenancy. My colleague, Deputy Martin Heydon, has brought several such cases to me and there has been much dialogue over the years regarding this issue.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The overholders can take very little comfort from what the Minister of State has said, irrespective of who may have been brought to him by Deputy Heydon. I have given the Minister of State the example of someone who is not a member of the public who is not outside the Defence Forces; I have given him the example of a serving member of the Defence Forces, who has served this country with distinction for more than two decades, and who, at a time when his children were undertaking State examinations, was caused to leave Army accommodation because the HSE was concerned about its quality. He was then made homeless as a result of having to vacate private rented accommodation. The local authority could do nothing for the family because it was not on its waiting list. One met a callous response from the Department of Defence which failed to house a serving member of the Defence Forces. If serving members of the Defence Forces cannot meet a positive response, what chance do the overholders have?

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not aware of the specific case which Deputy Ó Fearghaíl has outlined. If he furnishes me with the particular circumstances, I will bring it to the attention of the Department of Defence. He stated the family went to the HSE to report the conditions of the house. My understanding is the family would have assumed the accommodation was not fit for purpose so there must be other circumstances. When a person goes to the HSE and states accommodation is not appropriate for his or her family, I am not sure whether the Defence Forces have alternative accommodation. We must take into consideration the financial constraints on the Department of Defence. If it renovates one house, many other houses would also have to be renovated to be deemed suitable for accommodation.