asked the Minister for Local Government if it is a fact that he will refuse to subsidise a local authority housing scheme unless the scheme of rents makes provision for a maximum rent equal to the economic rent; and, if so, where this is stated in regulations made by him.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Subsidisation of Housing Schemes.
25.
Article 4 of the Housing Authorities (Loan Charges Contributions and Management) Regulations, 1967 provides that payment of housing subsidy is conditional on every new dwelling let for the first time after 13th April, 1967, being let in accordance with a scheme of rents approved by the Minister which takes account of the financial circumstances of the household and the standard of accommodation and amenity of the dwelling. Dwellings, other than those let for the first time must, under the regulations, be let in accordance with such rent schemes as soon as is reasonably practicable.
In February last, local authorities were notified by my Department that, in drawing up differential rent schemes to comply with these regulations, they should provide for minimum rents of from 2/6 to 10/- a week for persons with low incomes, with power to waive even these rents in cases of hardship. They were also notified that the rent at the top of the scale should be the full rent based on the cost of providing and maintaining the house. Under these provisions, a tenant would not normally be required to pay the full cost rent for a new house, unless the household income is about £40 a week. The corresponding income at which the full cost rent of city centre flats would become payable is in the region of £70-£80 a week.
The Minister appreciates that people who would then be paying the full economic rent would be getting no State subsidy or assistance whatsoever and that a person buying his own house and who might have a much higher income would be getting some State assistance? Does this not present a peculiar picture? Is there any way to correct this?
There is nothing to stop those people buying their own house.
That is the only way they can get State assistance?
If they want State assistance they can buy their own house. Obviously people with incomes of that order are better in a position to buy their own house than many other people who do so.
Does the Minister not appreciate that in most of these cases where the income is higher it is due to the fact that there are members of the family earning money and they do not normally remain in the house long?
In some cases that is so and there is no reason why they should not contribute to the cost of the house.
Could the Minister say in how many cases has this hardship clause been invoked?
I do not know.