Vol. 329 No. 3
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce pay-related mortagages for first time purchasers of up to four times their income through a housing finance agency; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
7.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost of (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce a home improvement and energy conservation scheme; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
8.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981. (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce a measure to enable house purchasers to insure against redundancy; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
9.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce a purchase and lease-back scheme for the elderly; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
10.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce top-up loans to bridge the deposit for those borrowing from building societies; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
11.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce a "no deposit" shared housing scheme for local authority tenants and for those on the housing list; (ii) if he will give details of this scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 11, inclusive, together. The Coalition Government's policy document published on 29 June, 1981, contained an outline of wide-ranging measures relating to the housing sector, including the proposals referred to by the Deputy in these questions. Detailed aspects of these measures are being examined by my Department as a matter of urgency in consultation with other Departments concerned. Pending Government consideration of the outcome of this examination, it would be premature to supply the details requested by the Deputy.
The Minister and his party in the policy document which they put before the people clearly spelled out the commitments that are listed in the questions the Minister has replied to. There was a commitment that the costings had been carried out and that the promises would be put into operation. The Minister should tell the House and the nation exactly when the promises will be brought into force and he should answer the questions that I asked.
The Deputy is correct in saying that we listed costings for these various measures except the one dealing with the new mortgage scheme for house purchasers because it is impossible to assess, until we see how many applicants there are, how much the scheme will cost. It is being examined as a matter of urgency. I hope to bring some legislation in this session before the House to deal with these matters but I would not be firm about that.
If the Minister has the answers to the other questions will he give the information to the House?
We are having them checked out at present to see if they are accurate. To the best of our knowledge they are, but obviously a party in opposition does not have the full facts. If the Deputy puts down a question in two weeks' time I am sure I will have the information at that stage.
The Minister replied to six questions together. Has he given consideration to Question No. 6 dealing with pay-related mortgages for first-time purchasers? What way is it to be financed?
The Deputy will find that laid out very clearly in a document published long before we published our programme for the election. We published this document last November. It stated clearly that we hoped to attract funds at present going by way of investment to other developments to the housing sector by establishing a housing agency.
It would have been helpful if the Minister gave the information to the House rather than having to drag it out of him. The document suggested that the money would be raised through bonds through a housing agency. Would the Minister not accept that the proposal would prove to be unattractive because there would be no return on the bonds for up to 25 years and that the estimate of the cost of this scheme is in the region of £100 million?
I would not. The cost cannot be assessed until we see how many applicants we have and how much funds are attracted to the agency.
The Minister is telling the House that his party put forward this proposal with no idea of the cost of operating it.
(Cavan-Monaghan): It was welcomed by the Deputy.
Obviously the Deputy has not read the document. There will be no cost to the Exchequer as far as setting up the agency is concerned. He should have read the document before he came in.
Is the Minister aware that under the present system applicants for SDA loans have to wait for an unreasonable length of time before getting approval for such loans because local authorities — I mention Cork County Council — do not have notification of the allocation of capital from the Department for a particular month? Such delay is resulting in applicants not being able to purchase houses in which they are interested because other people who have ready cash can come and beat them to it.
I am only too well aware of the shortage of funds in my Department.
What will the Minister do about it?
The Minister did not spell out details of the home improvements scheme. He committed £1,000 for energy conservation and £1,000 towards reconstruction. Surely he has the costings on that?
No, not yet. The Department of Energy say they would like to have a say in the detailing of grants available for energy conservation.
In the document to the electorate under the heading of house improvements and energy saving grants it was stated that it would cost £6 million in 1981 and that there would be a saving on home improvements grants of £19 million. Would the Minister explain those figures?
The last Government had a costing in the Book of Estimates of £19 million for home improvement grants which they discontinued. This money will be available next year if we make no change in the Estimate.
The Minister has a lack of knowledge of his Department. That £19 million is being used for grants that are being paid at present. Up to 25,000 have been paid already.
A question, Deputy.
As regards the introduction of a scheme for purchase and lease back for the elderly, will this system not result in a reduction in the number of loans available to the public?
I do not see why it should. It is an attractive scheme which is long overdue. There are many single elderly people living in accommodation which is far too big for them. They own it but cannot afford the upkeep of it. It is a reasonable proposition for the State to offer to buy the property and either rent it to them or give them the money to invest themselves and take over that property to add to the State's housing stock.
A final question.
It is not satisfactory for the Minister to say that firm promises and commitments made to the people have not been costed, that the details are not available in his Department and that he is not prepared to tell the House or the people exactly what it will cost. Could I suggest to the Minister that the figure he is trying to keep from the Irish people is somewhere in the region of £200 million?
The Deputy can suggest it, but I do not accept it.
Ceist 12.
12.
asked the Minister for the Environment (i) the estimated cost for (a) the remainder of 1981, (b) 1982 and (c) 1983 of his promise to introduce a scheme to abolish rates on agricultural land; (ii) if he will give details of the scheme; and (iii) when it will be introduced.
The administrative arrangements for the new reliefs are at present being examined and a decision about them will be announced as soon as possible. The net amount of rates payable on land in respect of the balance of the current year is estimated to be £15.315 million. The cost of relieving these rates for the remainder of the current year would therefore be £15.315 million less any saving arising from the application of conditions such as those set out in the Government's statement of aims. The cost in respect of 1982 and 1983 would depend on the level of local authority rate poundages in those years.
Would the Minister care to indicate to the House how the scheme will operate since it is suggested in his policy document which is tied to a five-year development programme with ACOT? If a farmer has a five-year development scheme and drops out after one year, do the rates go back on?
The Department of Agriculture are examining these matters to see exactly how the scheme will operate and the plans which would be acceptable and measurable by ACOT over the five-year period. It applies only to full-time farmers. There are conditions attached to the waiver of rates.
Very big farmers.
Deputy Wilson is obviously very ignorant of what he is talking about.
Big farmers only. There are 20,000 farmers in my county who are not affected at all.
The Deputy is displaying his ignorance. As an ex-member of the Government he is displaying terrible ignorance.
A display of ignorance is not exactly the phrase which should be used. The Minister said it is not measurable at this stage. One thing coming clearly out of the replies received to the questions I put down is that commitments and promises were made to the Irish people and we are now being told they are being costed. We are now being told that the details have not been worked out despite the fact that during the election we were told they had been costed.
A question, Deputy.
Will farmers who have completed a development programme be excluded?
No, not necessarily.
Answer the question "yes" or "no".
Full-time farmers——
I am talking about farmers who have completed a five-year development programme. Will they be excluded or included?
I do not mind answering the question but the Deputy should wait for the answer before he begins to ask a second supplementary question. This scheme will apply to full-time farmers who submit and have approved by ACOT or some other agency a plan for the development of their holdings. The Deputy was not so anxious to jump in and ask questions when he was on this side of the House. Obviously if a farmer has completed his development plan technically he will not be eligible.
Technically not?
Deputies who were over here for four years are very anxious to contribute now. They were not a bit anxious to do so when they were over here. Those who can show that they will continue to operate their holdings or farms to the maximum benefit without loss of production will benefit as well.
Ceist 13.
I want to ask one final supplementary. This is very important. I asked only one supplementary.
I think Deputies will all agree I have been very generous with supplementaries. In 55 minutes we have got to Question No. 12 only.
I asked only one supplementary.
That is my ruling. Question No. 13.
On a point of order, since I came into this House the Deputy who put down the question asked a number of supplementaries and then back-benchers were allowed one question. I do not want to criticise the ruling of the Chair. I wanted to put a supplementary question when Deputy Allen was finished.
It is not my intention to muzzle the Opposition in any way. I ask for their co-operation. I promise I will not try to prevent supplementaries being asked when they are reasonable. I must give other Deputies an opportunity to ask question as well. There are a number of questions still to come. I crave the indulgence of Deputies on this matter and I promise I will not try to stop any Deputy from asking questions.
