I wish to share my time with Deputy Callely. I welcome the increased funding for housing provided in the 1998 Estimates. The total provision of £453 million in 1998 represents an increase of almost 14 per cent on the estimated expenditure this year and reflects the Government's commitment in an action programme to providing a suitable standard of accommodation for all our people. Over £214 million has been provided for the local authority housing programme, an increase of £40 million or nearly 23 per cent on the estimated expenditure for 1997. It will enable local authorities to meet commitments on their ongoing programmes and to fund a programme of 3,900 new starts or acquisitions in 1998 compared to an outturn of about 3,500 in the current year. This level of funding is a clear indication of the Government's commitment to a continuing house construction programme by local authorities as provided for in its action programme.
I welcome the announcement by the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, of major improvements to voluntary and other social housing schemes. Highlights of this package include new maximum levels of assistance to voluntary housing bodies under the capital assistance scheme which exceed the previous levels by amounts ranging from £5,000 to £15,000 per unit of accommodation; wider income limits, lower rents, higher unit cost limits and a higher level of ongoing support for voluntary housing under the rental subsidy scheme; a 50 per cent increase in funding for communal facilities in voluntary housing projects; an increased income limit for the shared ownership scheme, with an increased level of subsidy which will assist shared owners to meet higher house prices; a £5,000 increase in the maximum local authority house purchase loan and an increased income limit.
This Government's priority is to ensure that households have access to affordable, good quality housing. The terms and conditions of the social housing schemes have not been updated since 1995 and have fallen out of line with building costs and house prices. This is leading to a slow down in social housing provision which must not be allowed to continue. I congratulate the Minister of State for reviewing the schemes and delivering major improvements to the range of social housing options. These measures are in addition to the major increases in funding for the local authority housing programme announced in the context of the 1998 Estimates. The package will restore reality to the local authority housing schemes, ensure their expanded use and provide an opportunity for social housing in locations where it had not previously been attempted.
The housing package has some excellent points. Under the voluntary housing capital assistance scheme, voluntary housing bodies are assisted with non-repayable capital funding from local authorities to provide accommodation, usually one or two bedroomed units, to meet special housing needs such as those of elderly people with disabilities, homeless persons or smaller families. The maximum levels of capital assistance have been increased from 1 July last. For one and two person units, the limit has risen from £27,000 to £32,000; for family-type houses and traveller bays, the limit has risen from £33,000 to £40,000. Special grants are available for communal facilities; where works have commenced on or after 1 July 1997 suitable proposals may qualify for grants of up to 90 per cent of the approved cost of the works, or a total equivalent of not more than £3,000 for each unit.
Under the voluntary housing rental subsidy scheme, such bodies are assisted with loan finance and subsidies from local authorities to provide housing for renting, particularly to meet the needs of low income families. The basic income for eligibility for a tenancy has been increased from £9,000 to £10,000 with effect from 13 November 1997. No income limit will apply to 25 per cent of applicants provided they are approved applicants for local authority housing. A new rent formula, backdated to the subsidy year commencing 1 July 1997, reduces the rent chargeable from 20p to 18p for each £1 of income over £80 per week. The formula also reduces rents chargeable in respect of subsidiary earners.
The recent announcement of the education technology investment fund by the Government represents a major commitment by the State to the future of the information technology industry. It is widely accepted the investment will go a long way towards resolving the major educational bottleneck which has threatened growth in the industry. The fund is a response from Government to the concerns expressed by the indigenous and multinational IT industry that inadequate resources were being given to the technology education area, and will also be directed at the more general problem of emerging labour shortages.
The investment fund is £250 million: £100 million in 1998 and the balance over the following two years. The breakdown is as follows: £60 million for additional places at both technician and degree levels in the computer software industry; £20 million in accommodation and equipment needs in the hotel and tourism sector; £20 million to support apprenticeship places; £80 million to renew and develop the infrastructure in the third level technological sector; £30 million for a major equipment renewal programme in third level institutions; £15 million to meet the capital needs of promoting research and development and technology transfer; and £25 million, balanced between capital investment and investment in teacher training in first and second level schools.
The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, is to be congratulated. He has said funding will be allocated on the basis of priorities developed in consultation with industry and education. I support the appeal by the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, to the corporate sector, particularly high-tech industry, to contribute to the new fund. She stated "through the fund the taxpayer will invest heavily in the quality of our education system and its graduate output will be of enormous benefit to business".
I welcome the recent review of public service pensions. Almost 77,000 retired public servants are to receive pension improvements averaging about £300 a year, at an annual cost of £23 million to the Exchequer, as the Government has decided to bring pension improvements into line with recent public sector pay deals. The Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, has explained that public servants who retired before restructuring deals were agreed under the PCW will now receive pro rata increases in their pensions. In addition to the £23 million current cost of the improvements, back payments totalling the same amount are due to the vast majority of the 77,000 retired public servants.
The control of farmyard pollution scheme was introduced in 1994 and proved to be very popular, resulting in more than 18,000 applications. The available funding was insufficient to meet the unprecedented demand and this was acknowledged in the mid-term review process, with the scheme getting priority status. This resulted in an extra £20 million being allocated to the scheme which will go a long way towards meeting existing commitments. I hope the Minister will make provision for further funding for this very important scheme.
There have been 8,000 applicants to the dairy hygiene scheme since it was introduced in 1994. The available funding was insufficient to meet the unprecedented demand for this scheme also, which was acknowledged in the mid-term review process which gave the scheme priority status. This resulted in an extra £8 million being allocated to the scheme which will go a long way towards meeting existing commitments.
The scheme of early retirement from farming is operated under Council regulation 2079/92. It provides an incentive for older farmers to cease farming and pass on their farms to younger trained farmers who, thereby, enlarge their holdings to create more viable units. To date, 6,750 applicants have joined the scheme.
The scheme of installation aid for young farmers was one of the submeasures operated under the operational programme for agriculture, rural development and forestry 1994-9. The programme had an indicative budget of £17 million for the scheme and was launched in December 1994. It was expected that about 3,000 young farmers would participate. By 1 September 1997 a total of 3,100 young farmers had been paid almost £17 million under the scheme. In addition, there are about 600 other applications being processed currently, with a potential grant commitment of about £3.5 million.
The Department, as part of its submission to the mid-term review, sought additional funds in the region of £10 million to enable the continuation of the scheme. This was additional to the funds sought in other areas where the level of applications had already exceeded the level of available funds. The mid-term review took on board the views of an independent evaluation report, along with a report prepared on the operation of the first half of the operational programme completed by Fitzpatrick and Associates, both of which recommended the suspension of the scheme. Accordingly, it did not make any additional funds available for the continuation of the scheme. I hope the Minister will reconsider this situation and make the necessary funding available.