I wish to share my time with Deputy Ulick Burke.
Private Members' Business. - Housing Crisis: Motion (Resumed).
The following motion was moved by Deputy Dukes on Tuesday, 2 February 1999:
That Dáil Éireann condemns the failure of the current Government to respond effectively to the crisis in the Irish housing market; notes that:
there has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of applications for local authority housing since the last housing assessment in 1996; couples on average incomes can no longer afford to purchase a typical starter home as house prices have increased dramatically; rents in the private rented sector have spiralled; the number of homeless persons continues to increase;
and calls on the Government to:
abolish stamp duty on second-hand houses for first time buyers; increase the first-time buyer's grant; establish a national housing commission; establish a Cabinet sub-committee on housing, chaired by the Taoiseach and consisting of the Ministers for the Environment and Local Government, Health and Children, Finance and Social, Community and Family Affairs; transfer the administration of the rental subsidy scheme and the mortgage supplement scheme to local authorities; dramatically increase the provision of capital assistance to local authorities to allow 10,000 housing starts each year for the next four years and to substantially increase the capital assistance scheme for the voluntary housing sector; bring forward a comprehensive national strategy to deal with the issue of homelessness with the Department of the Environment and Local Government taking overall control for the direction of policy in this area; review the 1992 Housing Act so as to increase the rights of tenants and to provide incentives for the private rented sector to develop longer-term leases; increase housing density, particularly in areas close to transport corridors, and to ensure a mechanism of enforcement by the Department of the Environment and Local Government on appropriate local authorities; introduce legislation ring-fencing development levies for the use of community projects in new developments; complete as a matter of priority an audit of all State-owned lands so as to increase the availability of such lands for social housing; introduce legislation to ban the practice of gazumping.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:
"Dáil Éireann welcomes:
–the record level of new housing output in 1998;
–the urgent and comprehensive range of measures taken by the Government in the policy document Action on House Prices, following on the Government commissioned report ‘An Economic Assessment of Recent House Price Developments';
–the measures taken to improve access by first-time purchasers to housing through improvements to the shared ownership scheme, reduced stamp duty levels, measures to tackle speculative investment in ‘starter' housing and higher housing densities in suitable locations;
–the moderation in house price increases in the second half of 1998 resulting from the Government's actions;
–the introduction of the Serviced Land Initiative to produce 100,000 additional sites for housing by the end of next year;
–the Government's commitment to a continuing house construction programme by local authorities and voluntary groups and the increased financial provision for these programmes in 1999;
–the increase in the local authority housing programme in 1999 to its highest level in 13 years;
–the improved terms of the voluntary housing schemes;
–the improved terms and increased resources for disabled persons and essential repair grants;
–the highest ever financial provision for the Task Force on Housing Aid for the Elderly;
–the substantially increased resources and the expanding range of responses to meet the needs of homeless persons including funding for the first ‘Foyer' project in the country;
–the enactment of the Housing (Traveller Accommodation) Act, 1998, progress with its implementation and the continued high level of funding for traveller accommodation;
–the introduction of tax incentives for the provision of accommodation for third level students;
–the fact that the Irish Home Builders Association has introduced with effect from 1 February, 1999, a code of conduct which addresses the problem of gazumping by house builders;
–the provision of funding for the comprehensive regeneration of Ballymun;
–the provision of funding for the redevelopment of Dublin inner city flat complexes at Lourdes House, Mountainview Court, Sean Treacy House, St. Joseph's Mansions, St. Jude's Gardens, St. Michael's Estate, Poplar Row/Courtney Place, Marmion Court/Queen Street and Bridgefoot Street/Island Street;
–the reference of the issues of gazumping and security of tenure in the private rented sector to the Law Reform Commission for examination;
and supports the continued commitment by the Government to expand the supply of housing across all tenures and to improve access by all income groups, particularly first-time purchasers, to suitable and affordable housing."
–(Minister of State at the Department of
the Environment and Local Government)
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Deputy Gilmore was in possession the last day and I understand he is sharing time with Deputy Wall who will use the remaining ten minutes.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
It is astounding that the Minister of State with responsibility for housing can deny there is a housing crisis, yet that is what he did yesterday. I know there is a crisis and so does he. His denial of reality is all the more difficult to believe because the Opposition does not blame him for it, at least not entirely.
Will the Deputy quote where I said what he claims I said?
Deputy Wall may continue.
It is not right for a Deputy to quote things I never said. I am as aware as anyone else that there is a housing need and a housing—
Crisis.
—problem at the moment. The words the Deputy is putting in my mouth were never uttered. It is an easy line for the Labour Party to take. We want to deal with facts and reality.
(Dublin West): Did the Minister of State say there was a crisis?
Mr. Hayes
Is the Minister of State short of a script? He should get back to his scriptwriters for that.
There is a tradition that, when a Member makes a correction, it is accepted.
However, the least young couples in rural and urban Ireland deserve from the Minister of State with responsibility for housing is some acknowledgement of the difficulties they face. Deputy Dukes has already acknowledged the Minister of State's claim that more money is being spent on housing than at any time in the past decade, and I also acknowledge that. However, the Minister of State knows that the level of housing starts remains considerably lower than that witnessed during the last economic boom. No records are being set.
The most significant question in politics today is whether ordinary people are entitled to a fair share of the dividends of recent economic growth. As the economy expands, the level and quality of the services which make people's lives easier must also improve. Economic growth represents an opportunity to provide more and better services and not make do with the legacy of the past. Many of our European neighbours may envy our economic growth, but they would not have our social services for love nor money. Put simply, as our economy grows, it is not unreasonable for the people who have generated that growth to assume that the money spent on their needs should expand accordingly. Under this Government, it has not and will not over the next three years. Spending on housing as a percentage of wealth is declining, not increasing.
It is generally recognised that never before has so much Government investment had such little impact on housing. It is precisely because of the contrast between input and results that the Opposition and others, including the EBS, have described the current position as a crisis. Speaking over the weekend, the head of lending at the EBS stated there was a need for housing units at around £70,000 to £80,000. They are not available, at least not in Dublin or surrounding counties. Instead starter homes in Dublin are selling for in the region of £120,000, requiring a couple to have a combined income of £43,000 plus to gain a mortgage under the criteria recommended by the Central Bank.
This is a crisis and it is not confined to Dublin and other large urban areas. In many rural areas where the dream of owning a home is still within the grasp of working people, the lack of support for sewerage and group water schemes is delaying developments. As a representative of a constituency adjoining Dublin, no one is more aware than I am of the extent of that city's growth. However, unless there is considerable investment in services in other parts of the country, Dublin will continue to grow. The amounts of money envisaged in the Government's service plan initiative will have minimal impact, no matter what the Minister of State claims.
One influential economic commentator writing in a Sunday newspaper suggested that the free market approach to the housing crisis has failed. He said house prices have soared well ahead of building costs and rents have been increased not only to reflect the higher house values but also the consequential shortage of houses for rent. The capacity of the State to respond to this problem is limited by the lack of an adequate land supply in which to build itself or allow other people to build, with an adequate social housing component, or allocate land to allow people build their own homes. Speculation in building land is one reason the cost of housing has increased. The balance between encouraging people to make zoned land available and the provision of land at reasonable cost has clearly swung excessively.
It is for that reason my party has tabled an amendment to the motion to increase the capital gains levels of housing land. It is also for that reason I find it difficult to understand the Minister of State's refusal to contemplate a national housing commission to debate what action might be necessary. Clearly measures above and beyond the ordinary are required. Implementing in a vacuum without adequate discussion will only give rise to controversy and opposition. However, through a national commission, a consensus can be arrived at to respond to the crisis, and many of the difficulties which might normally be experi enced in implementation could be easily overcome.
The rise in house prices has had an effect beyond the normal housing market. Many of the schemes used to improve housing standards or to allow tenants of local authorities to purchase houses have been badly affected by the rise in house prices. In my county, the number of people availing of the tenant purchase scheme has fallen considerably. Problems are not solely confined to the purchase of houses. There remains a considerable amount of badly maintained and derelict properties which could add to available housing stock if funding were available for schemes such as work in lieu, essential repairs and grants for disabled persons to refurbish their houses. Perhaps the Minister of State will consider providing 100 per cent funding for the last scheme.
It is time to reassess housing policy in a fundamental fashion. Young people are being priced out of the housing market. More people than ever are sleeping rough. Profiteering is rampant and queues for local authority housing are increasing dramatically. This is a crisis and these are issues a housing commission could address. All that stands in the way is the complacency of a Government which refuses to recognise the evidence before it.
Three factors have contributed to the escalating price of housing throughout the country and not just in Dublin: the planning sections of local authorities, developers and lending agencies. The three combined have made it almost impossible for young couples to make the dream of providing a home for themselves a reality. Unfortunately, it is now only a dream.
There are serious problems throughout the country, and in the Galway County Council area, with which the Minster of State is familiar, there is a clear indication of what is happening. The housing waiting list there has increased from about 400 in 1996 to about 900 today. I do not blame the Government for this huge growth. Over the years, local authorities have struggled to provide housing for emergencies. Only if people had five or six children and they lived in absolutely dire conditions would there be the possibility of them obtaining a council house in County Galway.
Prices in the private housing sector have escalated unbelievably. This can be traced back to the role of the planning authorities in counties which rezoned very little land, if rezoning can be mentioned in the current climate. In the revisions of county, city and town development plans, only small acreages are rezoned for housing. This ad hoc arrangement every time there is a revision of the plan leads to huge competition between developers for that small, scarce area of land. Inevitably the increased price of land is passed on to the private house dweller.
In his contribution the Minister said he was disappointed at the uptake of social housing. It is a pity rural communities do not take up the offer to provide housing to combat widespread rural depopulation. I hope the Minister will provide increased funding to rural communities to provide houses.
Funding is not a problem.
I call Deputy Noel O'Flynn. I understand the Deputy is sharing time with Deputies Gormley, Lawlor, John McGuinness, Noel Ahern, Eoin Ryan and Marian McGennis.
That is correct. I acknowledge there is a housing problem and that the Government is tackling it. An Action Programme for the Millennium specifically pledges a continuing house construction programme by local authorities and voluntary groups. It also embraces improvement in the extension of the social housing programmes generally. Substantially increased resources are being provided and there is provision for local authority housing that will allow 4,500 new starts this year. That is the highest level of new house starts to be sanctioned in the past 15 years.
The Opposition is demanding 10,000 starts each year for the next four years. That target is unrealistic and unachievable. Even if it could be afforded, the construction industry has not the manpower or the capacity to cope with that level of house building. There is a building boom, construction output is soaring and there is a major shortage of skilled operatives. The Opposition seems unaware of these facts, even though they are common knowledge. I did not think the Opposition would stoop so low as to express these aspirations in attempting to cod the public by tabling this motion. Even it could not be guilty of such blatant cynicism and opportunism. I hope we are not sinking to a new low whereby the Opposition makes many calls in its motions when we know there are several problems and skilled shortages in the construction industry.
It is becoming impossible for couples to own a home without taking out sky high mortgages. Even the combined incomes of some partners will not qualify for a loan because of soaring house costs. Runaway pricing makes it uneconomic for many young people to purchase a home in Ireland. There is no point in having a growth economy if house prices force the workforce to emigrate in search of cheaper homes. People should not have to incur lifetime debts to enable them buy houses in their own country. The increased price of houses will inescapably result in some people, who would have bought their own homes, looking to local authorities to provide them with houses.
Housing is at the top of the Government's priorities. The Minister is implementing many of the Bacon recommendations. The Government is taking the necessary action to increase housing supply, to improve access to housing for lower income groups, to improve the housing conditions of local authority tenants and will continue to take any further action deemed necessary. However, it will not introduce half baked measures that will impact negatively on the long-term stability of the housing market. I ask the Opposition to support the Government's measures which are geared to provide more serviced sites for the provision of houses at affordable prices.
I thank Deputy O'Flynn for sharing his time. As house prices escalate fewer couples can aspire to owning their own homes. We ought to head towards the European model where more and more people are in the private rented sector. However, this is problematic for us because we do not have security of tenure. This is a major problem which was outlined at the recent Threshold conference opened by the Minister. It is amazing that the working group document on security of tenure has been with the Department of Justice since 1996. Given its importance, when will it be published? The Housing (Private Rented Dwellings) Act, 1982, has been undermined and we have had the recent judgment from Judge Devally which illustrates that people are using loopholes in that Act. Dublin Corporation may say work has to be carried out so that sitting tenants can be turfed out. This is dreadful and it is happening all the time in the city. There may be constitutional difficulties here. I have heard various stories from eminent lawyers. Will the Minister address this problem? In Ringsend, Irishtown, in the docklands area where there was to be 20 per cent social housing – this was the carrot for local people – if they accepted high rise buildings around them, a developer is going to An Bord Pleánála to challenge this and to the courts. People have been misled in Ringsend, Irishtown. We have to address that constitutional problem and I ask the Minister to look at it.
Deputy Molloy, was a young Minister for Local Government in the early 1970s when the first ever development plan was adopted in Dublin. Built into that plan was provision for three satellite towns for a population of 100,000. For a number of years, in succession to the late Senator Jack Fitzgerald, I chaired ERDO. We projected that a population of 160,000 might have to be accommodated in the eastern region up to 2001. That report, while representative of the local authorities of the region, planning officers, engineers, etc., was rejected in certain quarters and was not implemented. The Minister's Department was represented on that body. Its incompetence in ensuring the recommendations were implemented has led to a situation where this Government is not capable of providing young couples with affordable houses. Those on local authority housing lists, who cannot afford to purchase a home, are adversely affected by the lack of housing. There are many reasons for this. When the Minister reviews the debate and the issues that have arisen will he appoint somebody to advise him monthly, quarterly or whatever on the Serviced Land Initiative with a view to its implementation on a fast track basis?
One of the scandals in the greater Dublin area is the incompetence of the engineering personnel, at department and local authority level in Dublin Corporation. They have spent approximately five or six years on the requirement to provide a greater Dublin drainage scheme upgrade at Ringsend. The draining of the north fringe could facilitate a population of 20,000. As Sean Lemass said in the 1960s, the way to control building land is to service more than is needed. We have been incapable of doing that for whatever reason. There is no point in wasting time listing the reasons for not achieving it. Instead we should ask what can we do about it.
Young couples in the greater Dublin area are paying between £20,000 and £40,000 more than they should for their first home. There was a certificate of reasonable valuation when it was not needed. Under the small builders' scheme, local authorities sold sites at a predetermined level to builders who provided a home for a preset figure.
Dublin Corporation, in the second half of 1995, made available valuable lands on the market to private builders who should not have been provided with this land. If it had been left in the ownership of South Dublin and Fingal county councils serviced sites would have been available to building contractors at predetermined figures and houses could have been provided for young people. That was not the case and it was purely as a result of pigeon-hole economics. One arm of the State was taking in resources and another was denied the facility.
The Minister has a major burden of responsibility at this time in his reign. I sincerely ask that he ensure the fast-track implementation of the recommendations which have come forward so that progress can be achieved and service sites can be made available, thereby allowing young couples to purchase their first home. This is the one item which will blight the record of achievements of the Government and its predecessors. We have not been capable of providing young couples with houses at a reasonable and realistic price.
I welcome the opportunity to debate the issues facing people on the housing list and the general housing crisis. However, we must be extremely careful of the language we use and how we put forward the various proposals. The Opposition, in putting forward its proposals, has attempted to raise the expectations of unfortunate people who find themselves on the housing list because some of the solutions which it put forward are not realistic or achievable, and it knows that quite well.
The housing crisis has not arisen overnight. It has existed since the early 1990s and it has been growing over the years. Successive Governments have not dealt with it in an adequate way. Part of the problem relates to local government. During the 20 years in which I have served in local government, particularly since the early 1990s, we have not analysed the housing list sufficiently to determine its profile and the methods to deal with it.
The traditional list no longer exists. It normally consisted of young people or married couples who were seeking housing accommodation, but that is no longer the case. It now includes lone parents, separated people, both men and women, and young couples who are unable to purchase their own home and who, in accepting rent allowance, are forced into the social welfare system. Therefore, there are a number of issues involved and the local authorities have a major role to play.
I would like to see, first, an analysis to determine exactly how many people are on the housing list. This is happening at present. It is unusual that in Kilkenny, for example, there are 900 people on the list and in Carlow there are 1,000 people. However, when the list is analysed those numbers will not stand up and the profile of the housing list will be different. Then it will be for the local authorities to come up with imaginative ways of dealing with the numbers.
The county development plan will play an important role in this regard. On the zoning of land and planning permission, people can be encouraged to build their own houses within their communities. A development plan must be developed in towns to encourage those who wish to be housed in their local communities to stay there. Houses and land should be available and initiatives in place which will ensure that separated men and women and people who find themselves alone are housed.
Local authorities have sufficient funds to assist in purchasing homes through the shared ownership schemes or in buying back private houses for the local authority stock. However, the cost of these houses is such that when they come on the open market the local authority and the people involved in the shared ownership scheme cannot afford to buy them. If steps were taken to ensure that starter homes were made available in the bigger housing schemes for which planning applications are now coming before the local authorities, it would ensure that young people who are starting out in life and trying to purchase a home are accommodated by way of affordable houses. There are initiatives which can be taken locally. It is only through a combined effort that we will succeed in reducing the numbers on the list.
There is a housing problem but it is being dealt with and there is a great deal being done. Naturally, I do not agree with the Opposition motion although it contains a few good points. The national housing commission will be a main demand of the social partners when the next pay deal is being negotiated. There is a great deal of merit in it. Many people feel they can make a contribution and I would like to see them involved in it.
There are two elements to the problem, the provision of housing and the use of existing housing. The provision of housing is being worked on successfully by the Government by way of the service land initiative. I want to make a few points about the use of existing housing. Under the latest redrawing of the boundaries, my constituency is now a three-seater – it was a four-seater constituency. Therefore, over the past ten or 15 years the population of the constituency has been greatly reduced. There are a great many under-used houses, most of which are private but many of which are owned by the local authority, and many of them are occupied by grandmothers. I am not suggesting that these people must move out having reared their families there, but many elderly people have told me that if they take in a lodger or rent a room, they will be forced to pay tax. This is an area which we have not addressed and on which we should make progress. We need to give a loud signal that all those empty rooms should be used and that these people will not be taxed. Other older people fear that they will lose their free schemes.
Mr. Hayes
The living alone allowance.
This does not come under the Minister's remit but the Ministers concerned must get together on it. If a person's son is unemployed and living at home, he will not be entitled to social welfare benefits. As a result, such people move down the road to a private flat where they are entitled to social welfare and rent allowance. Current policy is resulting in much stupidity. We are not making best use of existing housing stock and that needs to be done. Dublin Corporation is encouraging people to trade down and take a senior citizen flat. Under that scheme many tenants would hand back their three or four bedroom houses and take senior citizen flats if they received £1,500 or £2,000. We need to recycle existing private and public houses.
The Minister mentioned Ballymun in my constituency, where marvellous work is being done and there are some good ideas, in particular the proposal to sell some of the houses to reverse the social mix and provide some private houses from the outset.
The position in Dublin is rather messy. There is practically no building land left in the Dublin Corporation area. My colleague, Deputy Lawlor, took a swipe at Dublin Corporation.
It sold off land.
I will not argue with him. The Deputy would not do anything with it.
The four local authorities in Dublin should work together. There is a need for one housing list in Dublin. That would mean the county would get some of the starts which would have gone to Dublin Corporation. This year the Minister has provided for 600 starts in Dublin. Many Opposition politicians are saying that it is not enough, yet the city council has agreed to build only 400 houses because we had to seek the permission of the Minister to convert the money for 200 starts to refurbishment work. It is not just about building houses but about the quality of buildings and the standard of living.
Everyone talks about the lovely young couple. Only 10 per cent of those on the Dublin Corporation housing list are young couples with children; 20 per cent are single and 60 per cent are lone parents many of whom are genuine and need to be catered for but others are chancers. One may find that the boyfriend is on the list as a single person.
Mr. Hayes
Another convert to the Tánaiste's view.
I proposed that couples should receive an additional 20 points. We are not making the best use of resources. More needs to be done. The Department should concentrate on the refurbishment of existing housing stock, private and public.
I agree there is a serious housing problem. The effects are being felt in the number of evictions which has increased dramatically in Dublin city. A small group of landlords are taking full advantage and increasing rents well above the rate of inflation. Those on low pay have no option but to share with a number of others. I agree that the Housing Act, 1992, should be reviewed to provide more security for tenants. This would have a beneficial effect by reducing the pressure to buy.
The Opposition inform us that the economy was performing well when it was in office. It should have known this would create problems in the housing market but, unlike its successor, it failed to act. The Bacon report was a step in the right direction. It was a mistake, however, to remove the investor from the apartment market as it meant that demand in the rental sector would not be met. It is a question of supply and demand. The Serviced Land Initiative will have a huge effect in the next 18 months. It will result in an additional 100,000 starts. The increase in local authority funding will also have a significant effect.
The housing co-operative in Ringsend in my constituency has built between 50 and 60 houses in recent years at an affordable price for young married couples. Such schemes are a feature of the market in other countries. I disagree with the proposal that the first-time buyer's grant be increased—
Mr. Hayes
It is in the Fianna Fáil manifesto.
—as all it would do is push up prices.
It is the fervent desire of every couple to own their own home. In 1985 the then Minister for the Environment, Padraig Flynn, launched his document, A Plan for Social Housing. The response of the Dublin County Council manager was that he would not implement it.
Fine Gael's response to the housing problem has been erratic. On a previous occasion it introduced the £5,000 surrender grant which resulted in the destabilisation and destruction of established communities. I would not like the current problem to be addressed in a similar manner.
The motion highlights the need for 10,000 starts per annum. A previous Government informed local authorities that funding allocated for housing in previous years that remained unspent was being withdrawn. That marked a change in policy. On the shared ownership scheme, the income limits should be changed as they are unrealistic. The current formula of £12,500 for the main income earner does not work given that the average price of a house in Dublin is between £90,000 and £100,000. It is an area in which Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil local authority members, particularly in Dublin, have shouldered their responsibilities and have suffered the abuse which followed from that. On my local authority of Fingal and previously when a member of Dublin County Council I did not see the Labour, Socialist or Green Party members support any proposal to provide additional land for housing which is the only way to reduce the cost of housing. Fortunately, we have seen a scheme for servicing housing land come on stream.
There was reference to Dublin Corporation's problem with the existing housing list. I am now a poacher turned gamekeeper. I have served on Dublin County Council but I now represent a constituency in the Dublin Corporation area and I have seen the report which the Dublin city manager has presented to the members. If Dublin Corporation had not been so avaricious in selling off all of its housing land bank in Fingal for £11 million, we might see people on the corporation and council housing lists being housed. I warn those in Wicklow, Kildare and Meath to be very careful.
I welcome the debate which highlights the need to address this issue. If we share our experience and wisdom instead of being confrontational, we might address the problems of those who need housing in Dublin city and county and throughout the country in a positive way.
Do I understand that Deputy Clune wishes to share her time with Deputies Gay Mitchell, Flanagan, McCormack, Deenihan, Cosgrave, Perry and Ó Caoláin?
Yes. I am delighted to be associated with this motion because the situation is out of control and we have a serious housing crisis. Everyone in this House has experience of this crisis from weekly constituency clinics. I could give a list the length of my arm of the problems experienced. In Christmas week last, Threshold, the housing charity, dealt with 21 evictions of people from private rented accommodation. The problems in the rented sector are linked to the problem of home ownership. People simply cannot afford to buy houses. A single person earning £20,000 will only get a mortgage for £55,000 which is unrealistic given today's house prices.
Last week I was made aware of three men in their thirties who are sharing a rented apartment. They must be earning relatively good salaries because they are paying 46 per cent tax yet they cannot afford to buy a house. They cannot get on to the bottom rung of the house ownership ladder and feel they are facing the rest of their working lives in rented accommodation. This is in a country where we hold home ownership in high esteem. A home owner is held in esteem, is good for a reference and is given a certain credence by the courts and elsewhere. This status is denied to many people because they cannot access affordable accommodation.
I agree with Deputy Eoin Ryan and others when they say implementation of the Bacon report has merely reduced the amount of accommodation available for rent. We are now seeing the effects of that. Landlords are increasing rents without due notice. In some cases rents have been increased to £200, £400 and even £600 per month. Landlords are entitled to do this. Not content with using their rental income to pay the mortgage on a property, landlords are now making a profit as well as enjoying the property's increased capital value. There must be some control of rents. The rights of tenants must be addressed.
There must also be control of the quality of rented accommodation. Not many landlords have registered with their local authority as they are required to do. Why not? Probably because they fear they will have to pay tax. Last year alone, in the Southern Health Board region, £17 million was paid out in rent allowances. This is estimated to be only 20 per cent of the rental market as many landlords will not accept tenants who are in receipt of rent allowance.
That people cannot aspire to buying their own homes and are caught in the trap of rented accommodation is creating serious problems for the fabric of society. I am delighted to support this motion and I hope the Minister will take notice of our proposals.
I thank Deputy Clune for sharing her time. I have only four minutes to speak so I will get straight to the point. In 1998 Dublin Corporation built 148 houses. The corporation did not build houses in 1989, it built 25 in 1990, 74 in 1991, 80 in 1992, 71 in 1993, 277 in 1994, 366 in 1995, 310 in 1996, 181 in 1997 and 230 is the estimate for 1998. Therein lies the genesis of this unprecedented housing crisis. In poorer times when we were trying to form a government in the early 1980s, we were building 1,750 houses per year for Dublin Corporation. When we had hardly any money we built Tallaght, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown. Deputy McGennis makes the often repeated comment – it may be true or it may not – that the £5,000 grant took the best people out of corporation estates. Well, the people who are there are good enough; they are getting by all right, thank you very much.
I did not say that. The record of the House must show that I did not say that. I said that boarded-up houses decimated communities. The policy of the Deputy's party was a disgrace.
That is what I understood the Deputy to say. Deputy McGennis is more interested in making cheap political points than in dealing with the housing crisis. We need to build local authority houses at the rate we were building them in the early 1980s when we had huge problems with the public finances.
The land was sold for £11 million in Fingal.
One third of the population now lives within the greater Dublin area. Deputy McGennis again has jumped in with her two feet. I am not talking about the land in Dublin. We are talking about a population moving from the west coast to the east coast. What is wrong with spending some of the forecast surpluses of £2.5 billion in each of the next five years building houses in those counties outside Dublin and putting the infrastructure in place there.
Why was the land sold in Fingal?
Deputy McGennis should behave like a parliamentarian. This is a debating chamber and she is disgracing herself in front of the people.
It is time we gave consideration to building houses in large numbers outside Dublin for those on the housing list in Dublin and to providing the necessary infrastructure to let people get in and out of Dublin. That is not simply a recommendation made off the top of my head. It is contained in the report on EMU which warns of the danger of asset inflation which may have implications for Partnership 2000 and, in turn, may have implications for meeting EMU criteria. We must find innovative ways to do that. We should be innovative and build enough local authority houses to meet the needs of the people. This would increase the supply of houses and drive down the demand for them. Such local authority houses need not all be built on land in Dublin.
They could be built in Portlaoise.
I agree with everything Deputy Gay Mitchell said. The housing crisis is a source of concern and great hardship for first time hou sebuyers, many of whom have been priced out of the housing market. It is noteworthy that the property supplements of many of our national daily papers contain more pages than the newspapers. The crisis in housing is such that a modest three bedroomed semi-detached house of approximately 1,300 square foot in a far flung suburb miles from Dublin is selling at approximately £125,000. This demand cannot be dampened as tens of thousands of people remain on the housing list. The problem is nationwide and not confined to Dublin or our other major cities. House prices throughout the country have almost doubled in the past five years, resulting in large numbers resorting to the public housing waiting list. In Laois there are 950 applicants on the housing waiting list, while in Offaly there are more than 1,000 on it. This year's public housing programme in County Laois will provide for 60 starts, which is inadequate given that the list is lengthening on a weekly basis.
One adverse consequence of the housing shortage will be increased wage demands. We have seen evidence of this as trades unions argue strongly for wage increases, listing house prices as a justification for their demands. The reality is that wage demands granted on the back of spiralling house prices have the capacity to wreck our economy. Having regard to the supply and demand argument, one must assume that if the demand cannot be dampened then supply must be increased. Deputy Mitchell is correct on this. The key to solving the problem is to increase the supply by assisting the public and private sectors. Large scale rezoning of large tracts of land in and near Dublin is one option, but a sound and co-ordinated regional policy must be prioritised. Dublin and the east coast have become top heavy, resulting in traffic chaos and infrastructural gridlock which have become a feature of life in our capital city.
It seems the first time house buyer's grant and the reduction of stamp duty have merely added to the cost of houses and, through competititon, the apparent savings for the average couple have pushed up house prices rather than helped subsidise their cost. The answer put forward by the financial institutions has been to throw money at couples by ignoring longstanding guidelines on the salary:mortgage ratio to the peril of many entering the market. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the recently introduced insidious 35 year mortgage being offered by some lenders to first time house buyers. To the unsuspecting couple, this carefully wrapped and softly presented package can amount to no more than an elaborate confidence trick which will consign many couples to repayments month after month until they qualify for the old age pension. Such mortgages or millstones should be accompanied by sufficient warning to adequately advise as to the dangers and commitments involved and house buyers should be dissuaded from taking this poisonous carrot.
An increased supply of houses is the only answer to this problem. Careful and co-ordinated planning for growth should be undertaken in the Leinster area in particular. Towns like Edenderry, Portarlington and Portlaoise, where a building boom is being experienced should be allowed expand and develop in a co-ordinated way. The Minister should initiate a forum involving planners and county managers from Kildare, Wicklow, Meath, Offaly, Laois and Louth to address this problem. The difficulty is that we have no planning or long-term strategy to deal with a problem that has the capacity to wreck the economic achievement of recent years.
I agree with most of the Government speakers who acknowledged there is a crisis in the public and private housing sectors. Many of the proposals in our motion, if accepted, would help alleviate this problem. More and more young couples are finding it impossible to buy their own homes and are going on to the housing waiting list. There has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of applications for local authority houses in the past two years.
I agree with the novel idea promoted by Deputy Gay Mitchell. If the Government ensured that the west was granted Objective One status, many people from the west would not move to work in Dublin and there would be a reduction in the competition for scarce resources required to provide houses, road infrastructure and other facilities. If the Government supported the west, many people would stay in the west.
The number of people on the public housing waiting list does not reflect the true position. Many people who cannot afford to buy their own homes have not applied for local authority houses because they realise the Government has not allocated adequate resources to local authorities to meet a fraction of the demand for local authority houses. The failure of the Government to do this is counter productive as it will cost the country more in the long run. There has been a phenomenal increase in the amount paid out by health boards in rent subsidies. In 1989 the health boards paid out £6.1 million in rent subsidies, while in 1997 the health boards paid out £75.3 million in rent subsidies, which represents an increase of more than 1,200 per cent in eight years. There are approximately 50,000 people in receipt of rent subsidies and half of those are not on the public housing waiting list because they know they do not have any hope of getting a house. That the State is paying out £75 million a year in rent subsidies while neglecting to allocate resources for local authority housing represents bad management. The sum of £75 million would build more than 1,000 houses a year, one-tenth of the number we proposed in our motion. That amount which is being paid out by the State in rent subsidies could be used to build houses.
A report by a review group on the role of supplementary welfare in rented accommodation was published in December 1995. This group recom mended transferring the administration of rent subsidies to the Department of the Environment and Local Government. An interdepartmental group with representatives from the Departments of Social, Community and Family Affairs, Health and Children, Environment and Local Government and Finance was set up to examine this matter and three years later it is still examining it. Will the Minister indicate if the Administration will implement the recommendations of that review group, if the interdepartmental group will report on its findings and will the Administration explain why the rent subsidy scheme cannot be transferred to the local authorities, as proposed in our motion?
I compliment my Fine Gael colleagues on tabling this timely motion. More time has been devoted to discussing the housing crisis than any other issue in the past year and a half. That is because of the energy of Members such as Deputies Hayes and others. We recognise there is a housing crisis. It is a source of major hardship for many young couples and others. The more proposals we can put forward to tackle this crisis the better. I hope the Minister will not dismiss them. I heard him speak yesterday and I thought he was rather dismissive and critical of some of the proposals put forward by Fine Gael, which is most unfair. Good proposals have been put forward this evening which could be easily adopted and which would make a difference.
If sewage treatment facilities were provided in many rural villages, it would reduce the competition for houses in urban areas as a large number of people would move to live in rural villages. In-depth planning is not permitted in rural villages. As only roadside planning is permitted, selling land is not an attractive option for many people. I put forward that suggestion and I ask the official present to put it to the Minister, Deputy Dempsey. He is supportive of providing sewage treatment facilities in villages throughout the country, which is a measure I would support.
A large number of applicants who have applied for single rural cottages are experiencing considerable difficulties in transferring sites in the Land Registry. I suggest such applications should be prioritised and a delay in transfer of a site should not result in applicants having to wait three or four years to be housed in such cottages. In many instances, they move into the towns to go into group schemes. That would remove another source of competition.
The Minister, Deputy McCreevy, introduced the principle of public/private partnerships last year in the Finance Act. There is scope for more of this philosophy and more services could be provided through this mechanism. For example, large land owners would gain substantially if sewerage schemes were provided through a partnership between the local authority and the individuals who stood to benefit, and more land would be serviced as a result.
Those of us who have our feet on the ground were not amused, but greatly shocked, when we read of the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy's, ignorance of the housing crisis. There is an extreme shortage of housing throughout the State. Figures of 6,500 and 1,500 are quoted for the local authority housing waiting lists in Dublin city and Fingal, respectively. Is this the type of society over which the Minister of State and his Government want to preside – one where the lists grow but home starts sanctioned by the Government are scandalously low?
The population structure is changing. The 25 to 44 years age group represents about 30 per cent of the population of the greater Dublin area. The household size is falling and now stands at 2.6 persons per housing unit, while in 1986 it stood at 3.1 persons per domestic dwelling. The effect of net immigration to the capital, from both abroad and other parts of the country, as people find employment there, also drives up the numbers seeking homes.
The Government must look radically at the problem. It is a problem not only for those who wish to have a home of their own, but also for every family which shares the aspirations of their children to own the hearth and fire and all. Most parents are prepared to financially assist their children to scrape together a deposit so that they can have a stake in this country, even if that means their children are paying for their independence for 20 years through a mortgage. Unless a parent has recently received a large redundancy payment or is capable of raising a second mortgage on their family home, all prospects of seeing their children maintain themselves in the traditional manner are gone.
Local authority housing lists are growing faster than the queue for hospital trolleys. Couples with two jobs are unable to afford the deposit on a modest home of their own. The Government must be prepared to take action to stop this.
The Government must immediately deal with the delays which still exist in An Bord Pleanála. We are told decisions should be taken by the board within 16 weeks. However, this is more likely to take 20 to 24 weeks in the Dublin area.
The Government must review the first time home buyer's scheme. Not only should it increase the grant, it should also extend the scope of the scheme. The scheme should apply to the purchase of second hand homes where the vendor is purchasing a new housing unit. This would have the advantage of giving the first time purchaser a real jump in the housing market.
The Government must look at the number of older housing units which are under occupied, particularly in the metropolitan areas. There are housing units which were designed for families and which have all the community supports in place to service family needs; however, they are not occupied by families but are the homes of ageing parents who have reared their children – who themselves have been forced to move to outer suburbia. Those houses are too big for the needs of those who continue to live in them.
The Government must find imaginative ways of opening these houses up to meet current demands. Innovative tax allowances to allow for the discounting of rental income would bring life back into these areas. Other options exist, such as the State enabling and promoting the development of sheltered home units located in these areas, which would encourage elderly people to vacate their original homes and move to secured accommodation with all the important services which the older person requires. This accommodation should be provided in the areas where these people have lived their lives and where they wish to end their days among their friends and neighbours.
I compliment Deputy Hayes on raising this very important issue. As we approach the new millennium, many aspects of social policy are being examined to see if they are still relevant to modern demands. One of the basic needs of society today is affordable and decent housing.
The commitment to that ideal, which was once so honourable, is now in danger of being placed on the back burner, as our economy stampedes to new levels of prosperity, once thought to be unattainable. However, the old saying that a rising tide lifts all boats does not hold true for many of our citizens. It is unbelievable that there has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of applications for local authority housing. There are 2,000 people in Sligo waiting for housing. Private sector rents are continuing to increase and the number of homeless persons is also continuing to increase.
I call on the Minister to help deal with this problem by abolishing stamp duty on second hand houses for first time buyers, increasing the first time buyer's grant and establishing a national housing commission. The planning system has become part of the infrastructure log jam in a variety of areas, including roads, public transport and, in particular, housing. There have been extreme difficulties with rural planning.
Supply constraints have been a significant factor in the recent spiralling of house prices and increased accommodation costs have put pressure on labour costs and reversed the effects of Ireland's competitiveness. The current legislation, which dates from 1993, needs to be updated and related matters should be streamlined.
The recommendations of the Bacon report in respect of the need for higher density housing and more serviced land for residential development should be urgently implemented to help alleviate the housing crisis. The current review of the planning legislation should ensure that planning systems positively encourage the development of public/private partnership.
I frequently get requests for housing in the Sligo area. More than 2,000 people in Sligo town, alone, are looking for housing. Last Monday 50 houses were sold in a private scheme and more than 500 people tried to buy them. Those who were unsuccessful were very disappointed.
An Bord Pleanála's 1996 annual report stated there had been a massive increase in the number of planning appeals. Up to 3,424 appeals were lodged in 1996. Previous speakers indicated the delayed response time by the board to many queries. Local authorities should also buy land in towns and villages to encourage people to develop the counties.
I support the motion and the second amendment. I listened with interest to the speech of the Minister of State with responsibility for housing, Deputy Molloy, last night. He came into the House to present a patchwork of Government housing measures, as if it was a comprehensive policy. The truth is that there is no coherent Government policy to meet the biggest housing crisis this country has seen since the late 1960s.
Incredibly, the Minister of State dismissed the call for 10,000 local authority housing starts over the next four years and referred to the "danger of returning to the large, soulless peripheral local authority housing estates of the past". This is very interesting in the context of current tribunals. It was the absence of planning, bad planning and sometimes downright corrupt planning, presided over by the dominant political elements in this State, that led to the housing and environmental mess of the 1970s and 1980s. We are still living with the legacy. The alternative offered by the Minister is to refuse to undertake a comprehensive public housing programme. Once again, misery is being stored up for the future.
In questioning the need – highlighted in the motion and the second amendment – to strengthen tenants' rights, the Minister of State seemed to equate the property rights of landlords with the housing rights of tenants. There is no equivalence. The right to a home is more fundamental than any abstract right to property. It is long past time that a Government listened to those with dire housing needs: the homeless on our streets; young people starting out in life who cannot afford a home, even those on an average industrial wage; tenants living in sub-standard accommodation with no security of tenure and grossly inflated rents; and the elderly enduring housing poverty in their final years. We are all concerned about their difficulties and the injustices that hold some of them in a state of permanent need.
The Deputy should conclude.
I will conclude. The cut and thrust of this debate aside, I appeal to the Minister of State to provide local authorities with the wherewithal to tackle this crisis. He can help many needy families and senior citizens turn the key in the door.
It is clear from the contributions from all sides of the House that the current situation with regard to housing is a matter of wide concern and this concern is no less keenly felt on this side of the House. There should be no doubt that the Government regards addressing housing needs as a top priority and an essential element of its overall social policies.
I assure Deputies who have contributed to the debate that account will be taken of all the issues raised by them in the ongoing consideration and development of housing policy, particularly with regard to the need to provide affordable housing for those currently unable to secure adequate housing from their own resources.
The problems we have been experiencing in the housing sector in recent years are a direct result of a supply-demand imbalance which this Government has proved itself determined to redress. Never in the history of the State have we achieved a better performance in terms of housing output. Housing output reached a new record in 1998 at over 41,500 units. Ireland has the highest housing output per thousand of population in Europe, twice any other EU country and more than three times the UK level.
The Government has systematically set out to address the various factors constraining housing supply, but such measures inevitably take time. The serviced land initiative to increase the supply of serviced land for housing involves Government funding of £44 million which will result in an overall investment of over £100 million in land servicing and access, yielding some 100,000 additional sites for housing. This is the equivalent of an additional two and a half years' housing output. Planning authorities have already been advised to promote higher densities at appropriate locations. In addition, consultants are currently finalising draft planning guidelines on residential density and these will be available for public consultation by the end of the month. These measures are all designed to increase housing supply.
As the Minister of State with responsibility for housing and urban renewal, Deputy Molloy, indicated last night, demand side interventions such as increases in the new house grant from £3,000 to £10,000 are not appropriate solutions to the problem of affordability for first time buyers. It is widely acknowledged that such measures would serve only to increase house prices and widen even further the affordability gap that so many Deputies have referred to.
A crash local authority house building programme of 10,000 starts a year is not a solution. One has only to think through the implications: an adverse impact on the supply and price of building land if local authorities were to purchase the tracts of land that would be necessary, ensuring further upward pressure on land and house prices; the long-term social effects of creating large, peripheral local authority housing estates that such a massive programme would require; and finally the already serious capacity constraints on the building industry.
A number of Deputies made proposals on the planning process. Upon coming into office this Government initiated the most comprehensive review of the planning system since the introduction of the first Planning and Development Act in 1963. The Government has, within the past few weeks, approved the drafting of a major Planning and Development Bill which will completely revise and replace all existing planning legislation. It is hoped that this Bill will be published by mid-year.
The Government has substantially increased the local authority house building programme, but within sustainable levels, and grants available to the voluntary housing sector have been increased substantially to enable the sector to contribute more to social housing provision. The income eligibility limits for the shared ownership scheme have been increased to allow more households to avail of this scheme.
The budget provisions for housing this year concentrated on assisting the most vulnerable in our society – the disabled, the elderly and the homeless. Homelessness, which was referred to by a number of Deputies, is not just a lack of accommodation. The profile of homelessness has changed in recent years. It follows that the response to homelessness requires more than just providing accommodation. It means providing the necessary support services to enable homeless people to get out of the cycle of homelessness. Because of the complexity of the problem of homelessness and the number of agencies involved in providing accommodation and services for homeless people, the Government has established a cross-departmental team, chaired and serviced by the Department of the Environment and Local Government.
The Minister of State should now conclude as his time has elapsed.
The Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, outlined in his contribution last night the range of actions being taken by the Government across the housing spectrum. Given the serious housing problem which we have faced, the Government's—
Mr. Hayes
On a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle, the Minister of State's time is up.
I have pointed that out to the Minister of State.
Mr. Hayes
The Minister of State should conclude.
I am just finishing now. Nóiméad amháin.
Very few Deputies, on either side of the House, stop on the dot when I tell them to do so. The Minister of State should now conclude.
Given the serious housing problem which we have faced, the Government's comprehensive, prompt and decisive action and commitment to further necessary action, deserves recognition, credit and support.
I also welcome the motion and congratulate Deputy Hayes and the Fine Gael Party for using Private Members' time as an opportunity to raise this important issue. The present housing crisis is unprecedented. It is unacceptable that there has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of applications for local authority housing since the last housing assessment in 1996. It is unacceptable, and the Government stands condemned for not responding to the crisis. It is clear that the Celtic tiger economy is not improving the standard of living of many of our citizens. In a time of such unprecedented financial surpluses it is a disgrace that the level of homelessness is increasing, that more and more people cannot afford a home and that the waiting list for local authority housing is lengthening.
In County Limerick almost 1,000 people are awaiting council housing. With the construction of circa 100 local authority houses per annum it would take over ten years to house everybody. It is very frustrating to see families living in unacceptable conditions, in mobile homes, condemned buildings or in private flats where the occupants cannot properly feed themselves because of the enormous rents charged. People are suffering without proper heating.
In a small town in County Limerick a constituent informed me that he is paying £78.50 per week for a flat which is the only available one in the area. If heating is used he is charged £15 per week extra. This is exploitation and it must stop. The Government must immediately and dramatically increase the provision of finance to local authorities to allow 10,000 housing starts each year for the next five years. The Government must substantially increase contributions to the voluntary housing sector. It must respond to those in our society who are endeavouring to start off in life, to those who are without the resources to provide a home for themselves, and to the many children who are living in deplorable conditions. The Government must respond to those who had aspirations to own their own homes but because of the dramatic increase in house prices are now unable to purchase them. The Government must also respond to those who are living in overcrowded conditions, where parents and their children are sleeping in a single room with relatives, or in a single rented room because they cannot afford anything better.
The housing situation is a scandal. It must not be tolerated any longer and I call on the Government to respond immediately. I congratulate Fine Gael for raising this issue.
I support this worthwhile motion. It is timely that it should now be debated in the House. As a member of a local authority, I am aware of the need for a major cash injection for housing. There is a need for more houses to be built by every local authority, including Longford County Council. Members of local authorities are aware of how often they are approached by people who are not even on the priority list for housing. It is vital for people who are living in extremely bad conditions that the housing stock is improved in local authority areas.
In many cases the rental subsidy scheme involves people going from the health board to the local authority and back again. It would make sense to centre the scheme in the local authority. I have discussed this matter with local authority officials and they agree with my suggestion. It does not make sense that people must go to the health board and the local authority. Another issue is the income limits. It can go against people if there is one earner in a household. They are in a better position if there are two earners. I ask the Minister to examine this aspect.
I support the IBEC document. It contains much important information and many solid proposals on planning. I hope the Minister will consider the entire planning issue because it often causes delays in the development of housing.
Mr. Hayes
I thank the Members on all sides who contributed to the debate. I regret that the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, did not come to the House to respond to the motion. I hope he is not having another chin wag with the Taoiseach. On the last occasion he was the note taker at the meeting between the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Perhaps there are ominous signs for the future, but it is not good that the Minister of State with direct responsibility in this area is not present to respond to the debate.
The heart of the issue is that the Government has failed to recognise the extent of the problem in the housing market, including the massive increase in the national housing list. Deputies on all sides meet people every week at their constituency clinics who are living in appallingly overcrowded housing. They may have been on a housing list for two or three years, but they are not progressing further up the list. They are demoralised and they are getting no help from the Government.
Five years ago a couple who were first time buyers could afford to buy a house in Dublin for £63,000. The average price of a house in Dublin now is approximately £135,000. Average income people are completely priced out of the first time buyers' market. People seeking typical starter homes have no chance of getting a house. This is putting huge pressure on the private rented sector. There are countless evictions in, as Deputy Clune said, the Cork area and Dublin on a weekly basis. People are being turfed out on the street because they cannot afford to pay their rent. The Government will not even recognise the extent of the crisis.
This is because the Minister of State with responsibility for housing is a Progressive Democrat. It is a joke that a Minister of State who is a member of a party which favours the laissez-faire approach and free marketeering was put in charge of housing. The hallmarks of the Government's approach have been obvious in the past 20 months and were also obvious in the debate. It believes fundamentally in the principle of non-intervention. It does not want to get involved in issues such as the prevention of gazumping, which my party has championed. It wants to leave it to the building industry to sort out. It believes legislators should not dirty their hands with that issue because it is too complicated and that the building industry should be allowed to deal with it.
The Government does not want to intervene in the issue of landlord registration. It is a disgrace that the number of registered landlords in the entire local authority system has decreased. Over 80 per cent of landlords have yet to register with their local authorities. The Government does not want to touch this issue because it might be trouble.
The assessment which the Fine Gael Party produced last June showed the extent of the public housing problem. In an effort to help the Minister, I proposed that the assessment should include the period from last June to this March to get a better picture of the situation.
Why did the Deputy's party not do that when it was in Government?
Mr. Hayes
This Minister did not want to get involved. Once again, it was a case of non-interventionist, Thatcherite policies.
The Minister of State and the Government say the mortgage issue is the responsibility of the Central Bank. They are not concerned that young couples are mortgaged to the hilt. If there is a substantial increase in interest rates, the problem of negative equity which occurred in the United Kingdom in the late 1980s will arise in Ireland. This is another typical Thatcherite example.
I do not know who wrote the Minister's speech which he put on the record last night and into which he did not put much thought. A housing commission was not the idea of the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party or any other member of the Opposition. The suggestion was not made by politicians, rather by the Simon Community and Threshold, the voluntary organisations which the Minister patronised in his speech when he praised them for developing so many houses. However, when they put forward a concrete proposal for a housing commission which would consider the long-term strategy of a housing policy, the Minister could not even get it right.
Last night he asked what a housing commission would do. If the Minister read his post, he would know that on 1 December 1998 the bodies I mentioned which are working in the voluntary sector sent him the suggested aims, functions, structure and composition of a housing commission. We only amplified what those bodies asked us to do. However, the Minister's response was a patronising remark that it was a wishy-washy idea and the matter should be left to the Government.
That is why we were elected.
Mr. Hayes
The view is that the public service PLC will sort it out and there is no need to listen to the Simon Community or Threshold.
Another aberration which emerged in the Minister's contribution related to the Government's commitment to social housing programmes. Perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy Moffatt, could tell his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, if he sees him later that there is a massive increase in house building programmes every time there is a Fine Gael led Government. However, every time the Progressive Democrats get their hands on the tiller of power, there is a massive increase in the number of applicants for local authority housing. Our record is clear.
The Minister outlined what he is doing in terms of the social housing programme. He outlined what would be spent and said that there would be almost 5,000 house starts this year. However, the scale of the problem in 1997, 1998 and 1999 is considerably worse than it was in 1994 or 1995.
I am glad the Deputy accepts his party was in Government in 1997.
Mr. Hayes
The Minister of State did not refer to the fact that there is an additional population of at least 40,000 every year. Last year, there were 50,000 more people. This puts huge pressure on the housing list. I asked the Minister for Finance the percentage of money which will go towards social housing and the capital programme. He told me that 7 per cent of the total spend on capital projects will go towards the provision of local authority housing. It is less than it was last year and it is substantially less than it was when my party was in Government with the Labour Party and Democratic Left. When the Fine Gael Party was in Government, 9 per cent of the total capital spend went towards the provision of local authority and social housing for low income people. When this Government got its hands on the tiller of power, the figure decreased to 7 per cent.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
The truth hurts.
Mr. Hayes
This Government knows it has been caught out on the housing crisis. A Thatcherite Minister is leading the march. Fianna Fáil must realise the commitment given in 1997 to increase the first time buyers' grant has been welched on and I will ensure that Irish people, particularly young couples, are made aware of that.
Amendment put.
mc2,2>Tá
Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Aylward, Liam.
Blaney, Harry.
Brady, Johnny.
Brady, Martin.
Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Briscoe, Ben.
Browne, John(Wexford).
Byrne, Hugh.
Carey, Pat.
Collins, Michael.
Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Coughlan, Mary.
Cowen, Brian.
Cullen, Martin.
Daly, Brendan.
de Valera, Síle.
Dempsey, Noel.
Dennehy, John.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Fahey, Frank.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Hanafin, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Keaveney, Cecilia.
Kelleher, Billy.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.
Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.
Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McCreevy, Charlie.
McDaid, James.
McGennis, Marian.
McGuinness, John.
Martin, Micheál.
Moffatt, Thomas.
Molloy, Robert.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Donal.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
O'Malley, Desmond.
O'Rourke, Mary.
Power, Seán.
Roche, Dick.
Tá–continuedRyan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Smith, Michael.
Treacy, Noel.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Wallace, Mary.
Walsh, Joe.
Wright, G. V.
Níl
Ahearn, Theresa.
Barnes, Monica.
Belton, Louis.
Boylan, Andrew.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John(Carlow-Kilkenny).
Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Ulick.
Carey, Donal.
Clune, Deirdre.
Cosgrave, Michael.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Creed, Michael.
Currie, Austin.
D'Arcy, Michael.
De Rossa, Proinsias.
Deasy, Austin.
Deenihan, Jimmy.
Enright, Thomas.
Farrelly, John.
Ferris, Michael.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Gormley, John.
Hayes, Brian.
Higgins, Jim.
Higgins, Joe.
Hogan, Philip.
Kenny, Enda.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McDowell, Derek.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGrath, Paul.
McManus, Liz.
Mitchell, Gay.
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
Naughten, Denis.
Neville, Dan.
Noonan, Michael.
Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Owen, Nora.
Penrose, William.
Perry, John.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Seán.
Sargent, Trevor.
Shatter, Alan.
Sheehan, Patrick.
Shortall, Róisín.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Upton, Pat.
Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Nil, Deputies Sheehan and Stagg.
|
Amendment declared carried. |
Question put: “That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.” |
Tá
|
Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael.Kitt, Tom.Lawlor, Liam.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael. Ó Cuív, Éamon. |
Tá–continued
|
O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Malley, Desmond.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán. |
Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Wright, G. V. |
Níl
|
Ahearn, Theresa.Barnes, Monica.Belton, Louis.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Clune, Deirdre.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.Deasy, Austin.Deenihan, Jimmy.Enright, Thomas.Farrelly, John.Ferris, Michael.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe. |
Hogan, Philip.Kenny, Enda.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Shatter, Alan.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Pat.Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Sheehan and Stagg.