Paudie Coffey (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I commend both Senator Dolan and Senator O'Sullivan for proposing and seconding the motion. It is very relevant in the context of the wider housing debate, which as we all know is one of the biggest challenges facing the country. As a former local authority member for eight years and chairperson of a housing strategic policy committee within a local authority, I have had experience at the coalface where people with disabilities were presenting for housing. In some cases the local authority was able to respond but, unfortunately, in others, as outlined by the Senators, for one reason or another the local authorities, whether it was down to resources or the building stock available, were not capable of responding in an appropriate fashion to meet the needs of the disabled persons involved.

I welcome the fact that this issue is being put at the top of the agenda by way of this motion. Senator Dolan has long been an advocate for the disability sector, and he will continue that advocacy in the Chamber. I congratulate him on that and offer him my support, in whatever way I can, in terms of progressing the interests of the disabled, especially on this topic of housing.

The housing need across the country is one of the biggest challenges facing the Minister and society. I do not with to go over old ground, but we have experienced a collapse in the housing market. We have what one would call a dysfunctional property market. Local authorities were denuded of resources for one reason or another. I am not pointing a finger, but it is a fact that they were unable to build houses or adapt houses to the extent they would have wished in recent years. The challenge now is to rebuild that capacity within local authorities, and within the approved housing bodies sector as well, which I believe is a critical component in meeting the existing needs. I also want to see the private sector return to some level of sustainability.

When we debate housing for the disabled, we should acknowledge that some progress has been made. Improvements can always be achieved but the Part M regulations are a requirement for the building of all new properties. There are regulations governing rental properties also, in that they must be up to a standard that is appropriate for the accommodation of those who are disabled. That should be acknowledged, and it is welcome that any new housing stock, as we undertake new housing programmes in both the private and the public sector, must meet the Part M building regulations.

Part V developments were mentioned also. We are speaking to the Minister directly, and he is the policy maker who makes provision within the Estimates for housing allocations, but, ultimately, it is the local authority that is responsible for housing assessments in terms of eligibility and also for housing allocations. There is a huge responsibility for local authorities.

With regard to the strategic policy committees that I mentioned, there is a responsibility for councillors to make adequate provision to meet the demand in their respective local authority areas. I refer specifically to the housing adaptation grants that are available, both private and public, to accommodate disabled persons. If we take it on a comparative basis across the country, some local authorities perform extremely well in drawing down funds from central Government and the Minister's Department, but it has to be said that others are deplorable. I am not pointing the finger at local authorities. I had experience, when I was a Minister of State at the Department responsible for housing, of Deputies and Senators from all parties wanting to know why their allocations for housing adaptation grants were not as high in the current year as in other years. The reason is that the local authorities have not been as active in providing 20% of the funding so that they can draw down the other 80% of funding from central Government.

There is work to be done at local authority level to ensure that the strategic policy committees approach this topic in the same positive fashion as the Senators have proposed, but there is also an onus on us, centrally and at national level, to ensure that we provide adequate resources for people with disabilities. We do have a housing crisis and people are living in unsatisfactory circumstances, but all of us would agree that those with disabilities should be prioritised. It is not for the Minister to do that; it is for the local authority, which is the statutory housing body responsible for housing people. The approved housing bodies also have access to grant assistance to provide funding for those with disabilities. I am sure the Minister will outline that through the social housing strategy. I know he is working on a new action plan for housing, which we all look forward to hearing about, and I expect to hear provision within that action plan for housing to address some of the concerns the Senators raised. I expect also that mobility grants, housing adaptation grants and other resources that are required to meet the need of the disabled people who badly need them will be provided for in the housing action plan.

I mentioned the role of the local authorities. It would be remiss of me not to mention the cross-cutting that is required in other Departments. I include the Health Service Executive in that, which also has a role in terms of providing capital funds targeted at the acquisition and refurbishment of properties to accommodate disabled individuals who are transitioning from priority institutions. Between the HSE and the Department of housing and local government, for which the Minister is now responsible, there are opportunities to enhance resources to help those who are disabled.

I am conscious of some anomalies in the system that might arise from time to time. An approved housing body may apply to the Department for capital assistance funding but it falls between two stools because of the HSE funding or the designated status of the centre. That is an issue that the Minister and his officials should examine to ameliorate that anomaly byf creating greater flexibility to ensure that where people or approved housing bodies apply for funding, they qualify for the assistance available to disabled persons or people incapacitated in the same way that local authorities or others would qualify for the capital acquisition schemes.That is the main bulk of funding which is available to local authorities and approved housing bodies and just because a designation or status applies to a person, he or she should not be excluded from that particular category. I acknowledge that some work will need to be done by the HSE and ourselves in that regard. There are enough mechanisms - for example, the existing national housing strategy and national implementation framework - in place to allow for flexibilities to develop.

I have noticed another anomaly, especially in the south east, in respect of housing institutions for the elderly. They are registered as approved housing bodies but are regulated as nursing homes. They are not nursing homes but they are subject to regulations issued by HIQA, etc. The older people for whom these organisations cater live independently in sheltered accommodation, although with some support . Individuals who are housed in this way are being taken off the housing list in the relevant local authority areas and this means that local authorities or approved housing bodies will not have to provide funding for them. Unfortunately, because of their status, they are falling between two stools. If some of these institutions come under pressure due to HIQA rules or if they cannot secure investment in the form of various Government grants, they will close and we will lose these further supports for older people and those who are disabled.

I welcome the motion and the opportunity for all Senators to contribute to the debate on it. This is also an opportunity for the Minister and his officials to review the current supports and to enhance them, if possible, in future Estimates and the forthcoming action plan for housing.