Rose Conway Walsh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. In 1999, leading academics in University College Dublin published the study, Social Housing in Ireland: A Study of Success, Failure and Lessons Learned. Twenty years on, this study remains the benchmark contemporary study into social housing in this State. It contains in-depth analysis of the variance of social housing from the impact of the built environment, residents’ quality of life, social order problems, relationships with local authorities and other agencies. The study found that politicians had widespread misconceptions when it came to social housing and its successes and stated that policymakers "fail to recognise that non-provision of such housing would amount to greater failure for the less well-off".

In 2004, the National Economic and Social Council published the report, Housing in Ireland: Performance and Policy, which gave the most detailed analysis of the State's housing system ever produced. This report stated, at that time, that there was a need to dramatically increase investment in, and output of, social housing owned and managed by local authorities and approved housing bodies. The report also strongly advocated the creation of a significant affordable cost-rental sector for those intermediate households ineligible for social housing but unable to afford to rent or buy a home. Had this advice been heeded at that time by Fianna Fáil, whose members are now trying to take the high moral ground in respect of housing in what is a bit like a black comedy, we may have averted a housing crisis or at least softened its blows.

Three successive Governments have published strategies. Fianna Fáil published Delivering Homes, Sustaining Communities in 2007; Fine Gael and Labour published their Social Housing Strategy 2020 in 2014; and, most recently, Fine Gael published Rebuilding Ireland in 2016. All three of these strategies seemed to be less detailed than, cognisant of and simply ignorant of those two major studies that preceded them. What succeeded this was a modest output of social housing; an increasing reliance on subsidised private rental accommodation to meet social housing need; zero non-market affordable rental or purchase housing for intermediate households; and an increasing use of market-based financing mechanisms for delivering social and affordable housing. The consequences over the 14 years are indisputable: rising levels of social housing needed; ever greater levels of homelessness; and growing numbers of people locked out of buying or renting their own home.

However, despite the clear conflict between ideology and expert opinion in this regard, we still do not answer the calls of what is glaringly obvious. Light-touch intervention, chronic underinvestment and over-reliance on a neoliberal market to sort a social issue have failed. In 2016, the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government recommended that 10,000 social houses be built, along with 5,000 affordable cost-rental homes. This call was again made in a Dáil motion passed by all Opposition parties and many Independents on 3 October, which comprised the Raise the Roof campaign’s demands.

The Rebuilding Ireland 2018 third quarter social housing building report showed that a total of 2,369 social housing units had been built across the State by the end of September, less than half of its meagre targets. Failing to sufficiently deliver social housing in the depths of the housing crisis has not only condemned those who are waiting to wait even longer but, as stated in the 2004 NESC study, the great benefit of having a larger public housing sector is that it stabilises the entire housing system, especially at times of shock. Alongside the obvious chronic underinvestment, the Government is also failing to make policy progress on issues that simply have an ideological irrelevance more so than any evidence base. Emergency measures to stop the flow of families into homelessness, including passing the Focus Ireland amendment to prevent buy-to-let landlords evicting tenants when selling due to mortgage distress, are relevant in this context and greater efforts to protect those at risk of homelessness due to mortgage arrears, as well as stronger protections for tenants, including a rent freeze and refundable tax relief, must also be priorities. Low-hanging fruit policy measures such as the inclusion of student accommodation into rent pressure zones, Airbnb regulations, a robust vacant site levy and a deposit retention scheme, are all forthcoming at a snail’s pace in the midst of a crisis that needs affirmative action.

The right to housing, which was recommended by the Constitutional Convention in 2014, has languished in the finance committee and has been, ultimately, met with Government indifference. This is despite the right to housing being recognised in Europe in the constitutions of Belgium, Finland, Greece, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden, and in the legislation of Austria, France, Germany, Luxembourg and Britain. Around the world, the right to housing is included in 81 constitutions. Furthermore, the State has not yet ratified the optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which would establish a right to housing.

While we cannot expect leadership on this conversation by this Government, the Raise the Roof campaign is holding a conference today where the right to housing is its core demand. Will the Government continue to ignore the recommendation of the Constitutional Convention and the ratification of the optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights or could we have a conversation about the right to housing that would seek to help our most vulnerable who are lacking legal rights? Can we expect to see an improvement in the social housing output, given the poor results of 2018? We are in the midst of this crisis and we cannot under-deliver any further.

Some progress has been made on the pyrite situation with the Minister of State, Deputy English, but there are houses which are desperately in need of repair. If the Minister cannot deal with this today, perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy English, could come back to tell us what stage the work is at. The tardiness of the work, from start to finish, is not acceptable. I know people who know that their houses have pyrite but they cannot prove it without having the test and they cannot afford the test. Their mortgages have been taken over by vulture funds and they are very afraid of what will happen in the negotiations with those funds, given the fact that they have an asset with pyrite that is not worth the amount of their mortgage.

I also ask the Minister to have a look at the planning guidelines around planning permissions given by local authorities. A more holistic approach needs to be taken to planning permissions, and this is not to say there should be unsustainable planning. We need to take into account situations where the rent families are paying has got so high they cannot afford it, meaning they are in danger of being made homeless but they cannot get permission to build on their own land. There needs to be flexibility and I am not talking about the reckless planning that obtained under Fianna Fáil. I seek sustainable planning permission that takes into account the need of families in the housing crisis we face at present.

I am concerned about ever-increasing rents, not only in Dublin but throughout the country. People are in fear of rents being increased or cannot afford their rent at present and are engaging with moneylenders and other sources of finance just to keep the roof over their heads. I ask the Minister to have a look at the HAP and RAS schemes and the amount of money being spent on them, as well as on housing grants. I ask him to liaise with local authorities on housing grants in order to provide a bit of flexibility. In some cases, the wind is coming through the doors and windows and while they can get those fixed, they cannot get their roof done. It does not matter where the wind is coming in - it needs to be addressed.We need to increase the grants available to households, particularly elderly people and people with disabilities, so they do not have to stop when the work is only half done. A bit of flexibility and common sense, as well as a pragmatic approach, could solve many of these problems at local authority level.