Seanad debates

Thursday, 26 September 2019

10:30 am

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for the update he has given us in the Chamber today. I have a number of questions about different topics. The budget last year saw the announcement of a fund for the establishment of a pyrite and mica remediation scheme. Unfortunately that scheme has not yet opened for applications. A lot of householders who urgently need remediation works to be carried out on their houses are worried about this. I ask the Minister of State to report on progress and I hope he will tell me that issues preventing the opening of the scheme will be resolved to enable people in counties Mayo and Donegal to begin to plan to fix their homes.

What work is being done by Mayo County Council and Donegal County Council, which will be responsible for rolling out this Government scheme? Is somebody in the local authorities designated to deal with queries from householders? I do not believe this to be the case. This is important in order that people can understand that there is progress, the beginning of the end is nigh and they can get to work. There are some very desperate cases. I acknowledge that the Minister of State has never shied away from engaging with anybody from Mayo and he has visited several times. It is very much appreciated. I know he has a keen interest in this and great empathy for the people concerned. I want to thank him for his courteousness in all of this.

We need to expand the Rebuilding Ireland home loan scheme in a couple of areas. First, we must accommodate and provide a second chance for individuals who lost their homes through mortgage default during the financial crisis. I refer to individuals who defaulted on their mortgages at the time but have since settled their mortgage debts with the bank or whatever lending institution they were dealing with and now, thankfully, find they are in a good financial position to buy a house. As has been alluded to here, it is often easier or cheaper for someone who can meet the criteria to get a mortgage than to pay rent. I am thinking of a particular couple who approached me. They have thankfully put debt behind them but all they can do now is rent. They cannot go to a bank because their credit rating is shot and they have nowhere to turn, yet they can afford to repay a home loan. They deserve a second chance if we are keeping to the spirit with which we came through the financial crisis and encouraging people to come through it and rebuild their lives.

There is a second cohort of people who should be accommodated. There are currently council tenants who are in a position to buy their houses but they do not met the criterion requiring them to have earned income in excess of 15% of the price. I am talking about people who have just retired or who have acquired a lump sum for whatever reason - perhaps an inheritance or help from a family member. Such people are in a position to buy their homes or at least get a loan to do so. In the cases I am familiar with it would be cheaper than paying rent. Those people are being excluded and there is a fair case for accommodating them. This property will continue to be their primary residence and accommodating them would encourage home ownership. We all know the benefits of home ownership in giving people a stake in the community at large. As it usually brings good things to a community when people have that type of interest, this should be considered.

Another issue concerns incremental purchase schemes for new council houses. How is that operating nationwide? What is the uptake? I am particularly concerned because I have encountered a couple who qualify as having a social housing need. The male partner is working but they do not qualify as having sufficient means under the scheme. He is working, the couple is paying for everything and only recently qualified for the housing assistance payment, HAP. I believe they would have qualified a long time ago but they have always paid their own way. This is the only way to give them the opportunity to secure a home for themselves. There seems to be a disparity here. Someone can be earning and be on the council list, but he or she has to be on the housing list in order to qualify for the incremental purchase scheme. This couple meets that criterion but they cannot afford the loan associated with the scheme.

We all know there is no single, magic straightforward solution to the housing crisis. It is quite a complex matter concerning affordability, the rental market and so on. I applaud the Minister of State for his engagement and his interest in suggestions that involve thinking outside the box, particularly with regard to modular builds.There is a company where I am based called Big Red Barn, with which I know the Minister of State has engaged, as he has with any company or person who has ideas about housing solutions. We are set on concrete builds in this country, and while that has been our tradition, there needs to be a change in mindset, given the standards to which modular builds can be delivered. I am talking about nearly zero energy buildings, NZEBs, with A2 energy ratings and steel, rather than wooden, structures. I refer to affordability. A modular family home could be built for €150,000 as opposed to €250,000 and can be delivered at a much greater speed than standard housing. There is an opportunity for modular housing to be rolled out as social housing without compromising anything for homeowners. I hope this is something local authorities can be encouraged to do, and I have no doubt the Minister of State will play a role in that. I acknowledge that such builds will not displace concrete but will complement it and help meet the current supply deficit. I hope we can see some action on this.

I compliment our local company, Big Red Barn. It recently unveiled its new A2-rated houses at the National Ploughing Championships, where Anna May McHugh cut the ribbon-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.