Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 180: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of persons who have been refused rent allowance on the basis of having to meet such payments for the first six months from their own resources; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6259/05]

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 181: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has had any discussions with the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government with a view to improving the supply of local authority or affordable houses in the event of restriction of eligibility for rent allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6260/05]

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 182: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has given instructions to reduce availability or entitlement to rent support; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6261/05]

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 186: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of applications for rent support received in the past 12 months; the number refused, approved or pending; the way in which this figure compares with the previous year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6265/05]

Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 180 to 182, inclusive, and 186 together.

Rent supplements are provided through the supplementary welfare allowance scheme which is administered on my behalf by the community welfare division of the Health Service Executive. The changes, which were introduced in the rent supplement scheme in January 2004, were designed to refocus the scheme on its original objective of providing short-term income support to individual tenants in need. Longer term housing needs require a housing solution rather than ongoing cash supports. Some of the changes were first considered in consultation with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government as part of the work of an interdepartmental planning group established by Government to examine the future of rental assistance.

The work of this group gave rise to the new initiative which was announced by Government in July 2004 whereby local authorities will progressively assume responsibility for meeting long-term housing needs, including those of people dependent on rent supplement for 18 months or longer. These new rental assistance arrangements will see local authorities put solutions in place for people with long-term housing needs. These solutions will include additional social and affordable housing. The existing rent supplement scheme will continue to provide income support for up to 18 months where necessary.

According to the records of my Department, 57,874 people were receiving rent supplement at the end of 2004, a reduction of just 3.5% on the 59,976 receiving supplement the end of 2003. Some 41,838 rent supplements were awarded in 2004, compared to 53,750 in 2003. These totals include cases where a person on rent supplement moves to a new address. There are currently 388 applications pending, compared to 320 at this time last year.

Specific details of applications refused on grounds of failure to meet the conditions for receipt of rent supplement are not maintained on my Department's computer system. However, my Department undertook a survey of rent supplement refusal cases in the second half of 2004. All cases refused over a six month period in four health board regions which together account for one third of the rent supplement scheme were examined. The total number of cases involved was 438, indicating that the total number of refusals nationally is of the order of 1,300 per annum. This survey indicated that 4% of cases were refused on the grounds that the applicant was renting for less than six months and another 5% were refused on the grounds that they had a spouse-partner in full-time employment. A further 8% were refused on the grounds that they were not assessed by the housing authority as having a housing need and fewer than 1% were refused on the grounds that they had failed to accept a second offer of local authority accommodation. These numbers are negligible in the context of the level of rent supplement awards in the same period, which was of the order of 20,000. The balance of refusal decisions in this sample period were made for a wide range of reasons, including means, habitual residency or for issues relating to the accommodation involved.

After extensive consultation, I recently made changes to the regulations specifying the conditions for receipt of rent supplement, with effect from 31 January 2005, to address specific concerns. These changes removed the six month rule, extended the scheme to provide coverage for bona fide existing tenants who become unable to meet their rent or mortgage interest payments through illness, unemployment etc, and extends from two to three the number of refusals of local authority offers of accommodation a person may make before becoming ineligible for rent supplement.

Following enactment of the new regulations, a circular was issued by my Department to the community welfare division of the Health Service Executive setting out details of the amended qualification criteria. In addition to specifying the new grounds for eligibility, the circular also reiterated the discretionary scope available to community welfare officers to award rent supplement in any case of exceptional or special need. There is no question of any direction to officers to restrict the availability of, or entitlement to, rent supplement. The scheme remains available to all eligible people who are unable to meet their immediate accommodation needs from their own resources.