Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit go dtí an Teach. I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute on this issue. It is important to recognise that housing and homelessness are more than just issues of bricks and mortar or of the millions or billions of euro that are, or are not, being invested to address the problem. At its heart, this is fundamentally an issue of human dignity. The dignity of every human being, including Irish citizens, demands that they be afforded an opportunity to have a roof over their heads and the heads of their families. This, in turn, allows them to build a stable family life for themselves and their children. They can build a better future for themselves, which, in turn, means a better future for our society.

Central to this notion of dignity, however, is the view that the State should be - to use a rather hackneyed phrase - helping people to help themselves. While the State has a duty to assist people to find housing in the first instance, it is important at all times to remember that, in most cases, that is where the State's involvement should end. From that point onwards, people should be expected to pay fair rents for a dwelling suited to their needs, to the greatest extent possible. That is why it is important that people in social housing pay fair rents and have a sense of pride in, and ownership of, their dwelling. While it is easy to criticise the Government on this issue, and rightly so in many cases, it is also easy to buy into much of the populist rhetoric that surrounds it. It is vital that, in our efforts to solve this problem, we do not foster any kind of dependency on the State among those who receive State assistance in respect of housing. It is important to mention, however, that many homeless people have greater problems, including issues with mental or physical health, addiction or family breakdown, for example, and they need and deserve more sustained intervention from the State.

The Government is coming in for a lot of criticism in its response to these issues but it sometimes gets something of a bad rap. We seem to forget that, in 2011, when Fine Gael arrived in office, one of the main problems was the considerable oversupply of housing and the issue of so-called ghost estates. No one could have imagined then that within five years there would be a major supply shortage in the market. That said, there is understandable frustration over the questions of why progress in dealing with the current housing problem is so slow and what exactly the problem is that is preventing us from making sufficient progress on it.

Let me focus on a couple of issues. The problem cannot be pinned solely on the fact that we had an economic crash. I understand the level of homelessness, in terms of both rough sleeping and the numbers on waiting lists, is roughly similar to that in 2000, when there was sustained economic growth. Clearly, therefore, there are other cyclical or systemic problems at play.

One issue that has stubbornly persisted during both boom and bust has been the number of vacant dwellings. According to the 2016 census, there were 245,000 vacant dwellings in the State that year. That amounts to approximately 12% of the total. Although some of these were holiday homes and derelict, 183,000 were habitable dwellings. At first glance, this figure seems extraordinarily high but it represents a 15% reduction on the number in the 2011 census. Many of the vacant properties are located in western counties, where perhaps the demand for housing is not as acute, but the census still showed a large number of vacant properties in Dublin. There are 33 empty houses per 1,000 people, which seems extraordinary given the rental climate in Dublin.

I am glad the Government is addressing this issue as part of the Rebuilding Ireland plan through the national vacant housing reuse strategy. Particularly important is that strategy's objective of minimising vacancy in our social housing stock, which is estimated to be 3.5% of the total. That amounts to approximately 4,000 units empty at any one time, which seems excessive even when one considers a property being vacant due to turnover, replacement of tenants, etc. By cutting this problem in half alone, we would and could put a significant hole in our homelessness problem.

Separately, I understand that the Government believes that up to one third of these vacant properties are owned by elderly people who have gone into care as part of the fair deal scheme. Some economists have been vocal that the scheme encourages people to leave properties vacant since they say there is little or no incentive for the houses to be sold or rented by those in the scheme or their next of kin. I agree this is an issue that could be considered but this is an area of particular sensitivity in respect of which we need to be careful. Often when we discuss this issue, it is raised in an almost pejorative way. An impression is given of elderly people living in large homes, somehow squatting at the expense of younger people and their families. This is unfair. It is vital, therefore, that measures taken in regard to a vacancy arising from the fair deal scheme, or incentives for people to trade down into smaller houses more suited to their needs, must be strictly focused and based on respect for those involved and their particular needs. Once again, it is important that human dignity be at the core of how we deal with this issue. This must apply as much to the elderly as to first-time buyers and young families who are homeless.

Much work has been done to improve and renovate derelict accommodation in recent years but many derelict properties remain. I read an interesting piece in The Irish Timesa couple of months ago that mentioned a scheme in Liverpool under which derelict homes were sold at low prices to first-time buyers, often clustered in small urban areas. They then took ownership of renovation, etc. This had a positive impact in improving the area. It seems like a left-field idea but I wonder whether it could be operated here, or whether anything like it is happening.

Those are just some general thoughts on the issue. On the whole, the Government deserves some credit for trying to deal with what seems to have become an intractable problem. I certainly do not buy into the populist criticism of everything the Minister of State tries to do. I agree with others, however, that the time for excuses is running short. We need a substantial improvement in the coming months.