Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I had intended to nuance this amendment further by robbing some of the language from Senator Boyhan's amendment No. 9, but I believe I resubmitted the same amendment as previously.

This amendment would ensure that housing authorities were able to set additional criteria for applicants in terms of income and asset thresholds. I had expressed a concern about people who did not have a property previously or did not have large incomes but who did have significant assets, such as stocks. Housing authorities could consider asset thresholds and other wealth so that they were not using income as the only eligibility criterion. It may be relevant in some situations and not in others. Certain housing authorities may have particular cohorts and needs. We have discussed how there is a little flexibility in respect of the input from housing authorities, but there is the caveat that it can be removed at the Minister's direction. I am trying to strengthen the input of the housing authorities' local knowledge.

The core point we made on Committee Stage was about linking the idea of affordable purchase to the person. Instead of the price of the property being tagged a certain percentage below its market value, its affordability would be based on whether the potential applicants in our communities could afford it. I have suggested that affordability be tied to each income quintile so that, for example, someone in the bottom 20% or 40% could afford it.

I am happy to withdraw my amendment, which approaches the same issues as the amendment from Senators Boyhan, Keogan and Norris, only not as well or as clearly. Theirs is preferable to mine. Mine speaks about each quintile, but there is a danger that one could focus on the top 20% of people who do not necessarily need affordable housing. Amendment No. 9 properly focuses on the bottom 40% of national income distribution, that is, the bottom two quintiles. Crucially, the housing cost would not exceed 35% of the applicant's net income. This is an appropriate measure. If we were able to achieve it generally in terms of housing, it would be to the benefit of society and the economy. Having that security would allow people to invest in other aspects of their lives and meet other household needs properly.

I propose to withdraw amendment No. 8 in favour of amendment No. 9, if that is acceptable to the House.