Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Nov 2011

Vol. 747 No. 4

Topical Issue Debate

Private Rented Accommodation

I am thankful for the opportunity to raise this matter, which concerns the quality of rental accommodation within the city of Dublin and beyond, and the abuse of property by landlords who allow large numbers of people to be resident within some of these properties. At the turn of the century much of the literature from this city referred to tenements, the conditions within which some people were living and the poverty and exploitation that took place. As we look at the city today I am convinced that we are seeing the return of tenements to many parts of the city as tenants are living in conditions that are beyond sub-standard. These people are being exploited and are asked to live in conditions not fit for human habitation. Alongside this are neighbouring residents who must deal with the impact of such properties on areas, and in extreme cases the criminal behaviour emanating from some properties.

Although many landlords take their responsibility seriously, a small number do not and behave in a rogue fashion. These people have an extremely negative effect on the environment, tenants and other residents. This issue is particularly obvious in my constituency in Dublin Central and the city's council is currently addressing it, with my colleague, Councillor Ray McAdam, leading the work in the area. I spent an hour yesterday walking with residents along the North Circular Road and saw fabulous houses with walls falling down, windows falling out and a large number of tenants living inside. Many of the tenants living in those properties, and their landlords, are also in receipt of either rent allowance or rental schemes overseen by Dublin City Council.

The reason I raise the matter as a topical issue is that it is absolutely crucial that strong action be taken now to ensure that tenants living in such properties are better protected and that action would be taken against the landlords who are providing the accommodation to ensure the property is brought up to standard. Tenants and residents are suffering from the large amount of rental property that is moving towards a derelict state within the city and beyond. Given that the State is currently spending nearly €500 million in rent allowance it offers a tool to the Government and State agencies to ensure rental standards are implemented and that landlords do not take advantage of anyone.

The purpose of rent supplement is to provide short-term income support to eligible tenants living in private rented accommodation whose means are insufficient to meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. Since 2005 rent supplement expenditure has increased from €369 million to €516 million in 2010. The number of people on rent supplement has increased from almost 60,200 people in 2005 to more than 96,100 as at 18 November 2011, a 60% increase.

Responsibility for setting and enforcing housing standards rests with the local authorities. However, accommodation occupied by rent supplement tenants should at least meet minimum housing standards. In consultation with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, section 25 of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2007 introduced the condition that allows the Department to decide that a rent supplement may not be payable where it has been notified by a housing authority of non-compliance with standards.

Where such a notification is received from a housing authority in respect of an existing tenant the Department would normally discuss the situation with the tenant and take whatever action it decides is necessary in the best interests of the tenant. This condition is aimed at improving the standards of accommodation which rent supplement tenants occupy and supports the local authority in meeting its responsibilities on housing standards.

The Department must be satisfied that accommodation funded under the rent supplement scheme is reasonably suited to the residential and other needs of the claimant. Where the Department's representatives become aware of accommodation or blocks of accommodation which appear to them to be sub-standard, they notify the respective local authority and it may advise prospective tenants that rent supplement will not be paid in respect of those tenancies. In addition, my Department shares information with a range of other Departments and bodies with a view to improving the regulation of the private rented market.

My Department provides details of long-term rent supplement tenancies to local authorities via the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on a quarterly basis and this information assists in enforcing housing standards. In addition, details of new rent supplemented tenancies are given to the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, to ensure that those tenancies are registered by landlords. The Deputy will be aware that it is the revenue generated from PRTB registration which supports the inspection of accommodation.

The basic problem is that people who are living on rent supplement in the long term ought to be doing so directly via the local authority in the area where they are living. Rent supplement was only ever designed to be short term for people in rented accommodation who had suddenly lost their jobs and were looking forward to getting another job quickly. The rent supplement was to tide them over for a short period of unemployment.

I thank the Minister for her response. Within my area the waiting list for public housing at the moment can be anywhere between six and nine years. Because of that many people are seeking refuge in the private rented sector. The website to which the Minister referred, which provides information on the quality of rented accommodation, tells its own story. Last year, less than 20 cases were taken by local authorities against landlords for providing sub-standard accommodation.

It is evident to anyone who looks around the inner city of Dublin at the moment that this model is not working. There is a large amount of rental property that is not meeting the criteria set out by local authorities. On the North Circular Road alone, 84% of properties have multiple occupancy and a large number of them do not meet the criteria set out by law. Many of those properties have tenants who are in receipt of rent supplement. We need to either give more power to local authorities or they need to be incentivised to use existing powers to tackle the problem. We are seeing pervasive urban decay that is affecting tenants and other residents.

I know the North Circular Road area very well. I am aware from the external appearance that issues potentially arise with much of the accommodation ones sees on the road. The solution is to transfer over a period responsibility for rent supplement so that in future it would be overseen by the local authority. As Deputy Donohoe is probably aware, in some cases people refuse offers of decent accommodation in good local authority houses in favour of private rented accommodation. That does not happen as much in Dublin but more so in some areas outside of Dublin.

We need to integrate housing provision schemes. The rental accommodation scheme, RAS, has great potential. After I became Minister I met local authority managers and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, and Deputy Penrose when he was Minister of State with responsibility for housing to see whether we could work in a co-ordinated way over a period to improve the situation described by Deputy Donohoe.

We must also ensure that all landlords are properly registered, that we have their PRSI numbers and that they pay tax. The Department of Social Protection is currently paying for half the private rented accommodation in the country, for more than 95,000 people, and the cost is well over €500 million. The cost to the taxpayer is very high. We will be able to find a better solution when we transfer more of the tenancies. At the moment the desire is that anyone who is on rent supplement for more than 18 months should go into a local authority, RAS-type situation. However, that is taking a great deal of time to achieve. One of the problems compounding the situation is that local authorities have approximately 88 separate schemes of differential rent, so when people move from one scheme to another the IT systems do not talk to each other. It is extremely difficult to deal with the issue but it is an area I hope to see progressed.

A working group from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Department of Social Protection meets regularly to try to see whether we can transfer more tenancies at a faster rate to local authorities, which will then have a much more direct interest in the quality of the accommodation. By and large, community welfare officers, who are now employees of my Department, and social welfare officers are not skilled in the area of inspecting property. It is not something they have done. This is a function that should be carried out by the housing departments of local authorities. They are the people with the skills.

House Prices

I very much welcome the opportunity to raise this concern which I share with many others, namely, the proposal by NAMA to sell 750 houses at terms which give buyers, in effect, a 20% discount.

I appreciate that the scheme is dressed up as one which offers insurance to buyers against a fall in the value of the property in the five-year period subsequent to the sale, but the reality is that by deferring 20% of the market price it acts as a subsidy because the down side risk of any house purchase nowadays is factored into the market price. That is the whole problem with the housing market at the moment, and one of the reasons it has not bottomed out.

I have a number of concerns on this issue. The first is that it exposes the taxpayer to further risk. The taxpayer who paid to buy the original loan on the asset is now being asked to subsidise the sale of the asset as well.

The argument that the sale would generate VAT revenue and that the most taxpayers could lose would be €65 million is utterly spurious. There would be VAT revenue and no risk if the houses were sold at whatever the market would bear, however low that might be.

My second concern is the market manipulation of house prices, which is precisely what caused our current economic woes and is totally contrary to current Government policy. It artificially inflates the notional value of a house. This is a complete distortion of the housing market and prevents, or at least postpones, the return to any kind of a real market for houses, whatever that level may be.

My third concern is related. It is the damaging impact on other house sales and on the hapless owners, many of whom are in negative equity, who wish to sell their houses. These houses are, in many cases, similar to the NAMA properties and sometimes even next door to them. These vendors now find their homes unsaleable at the market price because the house next door is being sold 20% cheaper. Similar houses, which are privately owned and being privately sold are devalued by 20%. In fact, the entire housing market will now be benchmarked by this extraordinary device. It is totally artificial and is not what the housing market needs at present.

NAMA believes it does not need Government approval for this scheme and I know its powers are considerable. However, it does have a responsibility, as we do, to protect the interests of taxpayers. I do not believe this scheme does that. In fact, it is against the interests of taxpayers and I ask the Minister to consider the implications of this further exposure of taxpayers.

I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue and for her reflective remarks concerning the proposal the chief executive officer of NAMA has made to the Minister for Finance. My understanding from the Minister is that the chief executive of NAMA has sought his agreement to the introduction of a deferred consideration mortgage initiative by the agency in respect of its domestic residential property portfolio.

The proposal is one of a range of initiatives that NAMA is examining with a view tomaximising the return on its asset portfolio. Prior to its submission to the Minister, I am informed that the initiative had been approved by the NAMA board. The details of the initiative are currently being reviewed within the Department and the Minister will respond to NAMA when that review has been completed.

The broad concept is that NAMA will offer a limited price protection — 20% of the purchase price for five years — to buyers of its housing stock. The limited protection will be 20% of the purchase price for five years. It proposes that it will be apply to 750 units with an estimated value of about €150 million. This means that a buyer would pay 80% of the purchase price up-front, funded by a 10% deposit and a first mortgage tranche of 70%. A second tranche of 20% would be payable in five years to the extent that the property value had not fallen at that stage.

NAMA will not be providing the finance directly. Rather it will work with existing mortgage providers. In this context the CEO of NAMA recently said the agency has had detailed discussions with AIB, Bank of Ireland and Permanent TSB. He also stated the agency had asked the other banks, through the Irish Banking Federation, if they wished to participate. Any mortgage provider participating in the initiative would issue the mortgage with its own underwriting criteria. The mortgage provider must commit to the second tranche at the outset, subject only to the final property value.

While some commentators and analysts have suggested that the initiative could artificially support house prices, NAMA has engaged consultants to complete an economic study of the potential impact of the initiative. It concludes that the most probable impact will be to accelerate movement towards a natural price floor. The agency also suggests that an alternative strategy of non-intervention could lead to a prolonged period of stagnation, with potential buyers continuing to defer purchases. In support of this, the NAMA CEO recently pointed out that in the first half of 2011, only €1.2 billion in mortgages were drawn down, which suggests that draw-downs for the year as a whole could be around half of the €4.5 billion figure which was Goodbody Stockbrokers' prediction at the start of the year.

It is in all our interests that every effort be made to get the market moving again, with prices set at realistic levels. For example, NAMA's experience with one developer whom it instructed, on foot of an agreement reached with him, to reduce the price of houses in a development built three years ago, was that over the course of two weekends some 20 of the houses in question were sold. This confirms that the market is quite price sensitive.

Overall, NAMA is focused on managing its assets to achieve the best possible return for taxpayers without engaging in the dumping or speculative hoarding of property assets. In this regard, NAMA believes the deferred consideration initiative will protect portfolio value and optimise taxpayer benefit better than a non-intervention strategy.

There are risks associated with the initiative, as the Deputy rightly pointed out in her contribution. In discussions with the Department of Finance, NAMA has sought to address these risks. NAMA also has assured the Minister that it will limit the initiative so that its scale will not create significant market distortion or artificial price support. However, the initiative is still being considered and the Minister will reply to NAMA when those considerations are complete.

I accept that the motivation behind this proposal is to find an ingenious way of getting the market going again, disposing of properties and recouping the taxpayers' outlay. I remind the Minister of State and the House that NAMA is the largest property owner in the world. While the initial sale is of a mere 750 houses it is to be extended to 5,000, and the potential damage of that number of sales is enormous and will be enduring. Apart from the impact of the subsidy on price, there will be a huge impact on the volume of other sales. Incredibly, it seems that NAMA is now going to facilitate the provision of finance, as the Minister of State has said, through the three named banks. At best, this will absorb almost all the available bank mortgages, leaving no finance for private sellers and buyers. At worst, I suspect that NAMA will, effectively, provide some kind of mortgage insurance for the banks, which disadvantages other sellers and buyers and distorts the market.

This is another unquantifiable risk being piled on the backs of taxpayers and is not in accordance with the mandate of NAMA, which is to protect taxpayers. The scheme should not be allowed to proceed, at least without pause for thought about its implications.

I thank the Deputy for the points she has made in this short debate. She has done a great service to the House in raising these issues.

On behalf of the Minister for Finance, I remind the House that the matter is under consideration. When NAMA wrote to the Minister it sought his agreement and that of the Government to the proposed initiative. In all of these matters, a balance must be struck between trying to maximise the potential return for taxpayers, through NAMA, on the sale of these assets and trying to get the property market going again. As I am sure the Deputy is aware, there is no market currently. We all have a vested interest, in terms of our pensions, the future of the country and the construction industry, in making sure we get to the bottom of the bottom of the housing market. Whether that can be done through this scheme is a matter on which the Minister has yet to come to a final view.

It is my understanding from NAMA that a total of 10,000 properties currently exist on its portfolio. Of these, 8,000 are apartments and 2,000 are more traditional semi-detached and detached houses. I do not think the 8,000 apartment units would be part of this tranche, because the current demand is for more conventional houses.

We will work with NAMA to see the best option. The Deputy has, rightly, stated the concerns attached to this proposal and these are matters on which the Minister will reflect before coming to a final decision. I appreciate the Deputy's remarks.

Foreign Conflicts

Many are calling the events in Egypt a second revolution. I offer my full support to ordinary young people and workers in Egypt who are attempting to conclude the process started earlier this year with the overthrow of President Mubarak, an ally of successive US Administrations. The repression he imposed and the global economic crisis kicked off the revolutionary process earlier this year and raised the hopes of many ordinary people for fundamental change. The road to genuine freedom and democracy was not being blocked by just one man and his cronies but by an entire military cast and capitalist interests. The military's failure to hand over power and its unleashing of repressive measures in excess of President Mubarak's have caused outrage across the globe. In recent days thousands of activists have fought running battles with state forces over the control of Tahrir Square. Some 33 people have been killed and almost 2,000 seriously injured. The military has extended the 30-year state of emergency, with arbitrary detention being the norm and some 12,000 civilian critics facing military tribunals.

While we have seen the beginnings of a crack in the regime, clearly the situation is serious. The efforts of ordinary people to secure a decent future must progress. I, therefore, support the call for the holding of urgent genuine elections, which would constitute the first step of a process to improve democratic rights and ensure a better future for the ordinary people of the region.

I call on the Government, in particular the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, to condemn immediately, clearly, unequivocally and publicly the Egyptian military regime for the massacre of 33 protestors in Tahrir Square during the weekend and as many as 50 protestors in the past week or two. I also ask the Government to call publicly and unequivocally for the military clique surrounding Field Marshal Tantawi, a thug of President Mubarak, to step down, relinquish power to the civil authorities and give an immediate undertaking that democratic elections will be allowed to take place and that those elected will have full power without military intrusion. Will the Tánaiste call in the Egyptian ambassador who is located on Clyde Road in Ballsbridge to tell him that, unless there is a clear undertaking from the Egyptian authorities that they will end the repression of the democratic revolution in Egypt immediately, he will be expelled from Ireland and that we will sever diplomatic and other ties with the regime?

Will the Government speak out about the involvement of the United States through its continuing arming and support of the military clique responsible for the massacre during the weekend? Will the Government make public statements and call in the Saudi ambassador to question him on his country's financing of Salafi gangs which are whipping up sectarian conflict between Christians and Muslims and focusing vicious attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt in an attempt to disorganise and divide the country's democratic forces?

These are important steps that the Government could take to support the democratic revolution in Egypt, which is of historical importance. If the revolution is defeated, it will set back the cause of democracy in the Middle East for many years to come. The Government must side publicly with the protestors who are laying down their lives in the fight for democracy, justice and equality in Egypt.

Like many in the international community, the Government has been closely following events in Egypt in recent days in the run-up to historic parliamentary elections which are due to get under way on 28 November. We all recall the events last February in Tahrir Square which proved so inspiring, when the discredited government of former President Hosni Mubarak was swept away in an impressive demonstration of people power. In the intervening nine months, Ireland and its EU partners have been monitoring closely the transition to democratic rule in Egypt. We have been offering all possible political support and responded positively to requests for practical assistance. It is recognised that, as in other countries undergoing democratic transformation in the region, the uprising in Egypt that ended President Mubarak's rule was a genuinely popular one, drawing support from all sectors of society, and that it is for Egypt itself to determine the pace of its own transition and how the international community can best assist.

It needs to be recognised that profound and historic changes have taken place in Egypt during the past nine months. The country is on the verge of holding its first genuinely free elections in many years. Political parties have been openly campaigning, many of which, including those linked with the Muslim Brotherhood, would only have encountered repression previously. The former President and his close associates have been publicly put on trial for their crimes, an event to behold for ordinary Egyptians when they consider how impregnable the rule of President Mubarak appeared just one short year ago.

Despite this, concern has been growing in recent months at the overall slow pace of the transition in Egypt and the degree of real change and reform taking place. Despite repeated requests from the European Union and others, the ruling Supreme Command of the Armed Forces has refused to lift the long-standing state of emergency. As a hard hitting Amnesty International report has highlighted in recent days, we have continued to see large-scale trials of civilians in military courts, as well as many credible reports of arbitrary detention and torture.

Also of considerable concern has been the growth in sectarian tension. This had its most recent manifestation last month, when more than 20 people, mostly Coptic Christians, were killed after coming under attack from elements linked with Egyptian security forces. The military authorities have undertaken to investigate these deaths fully and also promised legislation to address well founded Coptic grievances. As with other aspects of the change agenda in Egypt, the pace of reform has been slow and hesitant.

Most recently, the prospect of military rule continuing until well into 2013 has caused renewed apprehension among many ordinary Egyptians, as well as Egypt's international partners. That this and other failures to realise the full promise of change have given way to renewed violence and deaths is regrettable. The Government joins others in the international community such as High Representative Ashton and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in expressing our deep concern about and condemnation of the violence in Tahrir Square and other parts of Egypt that is now estimated to have claimed at least 33 lives.

The need for restraint, an avoidance of all violence and renewed dialogue on all sides is obvious. There is no doubt that excessive force has been used by the Egyptian police and security forces in responding to what are peaceful demonstrations in Tahrir Square and other Egyptian cities. The clear impetus behind all the renewed violence and tensions of recent days is the failure to respect fully the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people. High Representative Ashton has warned that the demands of ordinary Egyptians and their political parties for a progressively unfolding transition that will safeguard the principles of democracy must be listened to.

The head of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces in Egypt, Field Marshal Tantawi, has undertaken to advance the date for the presidential election to next July. He has also held out the prospect of a referendum on the military continuing to play a political role in Egypt. A new government is also likely to be formed. This is a step forward, but considerably more remains to be done if the democratic promise of last February's Tahrir Square revolution is to be fulfilled and if a genuine process of democratic change akin to what is being observed in Tunisia and Libya is to get under way. The Government will continue to work with our EU and international partners to assist Egypt along the path towards democratic transformation.

It is too early for the Minister of State to use Libya as an example. It is interesting that he says Egypt can determine the pace of its transition when different criteria were set down in the case of Libya. Western imperial powers stood back and propped up President Mubarak during the years to allow him to use brute force on his population and the West did not care as long as its interests were being protected. The West would be quite happy with any regime in the area if it was capable of keeping a lid on matters. Soundings of concern at this stage are the result of the people putting the spotlight on their oppression, on which the eyes of the world have focused the eyes. Ordinary people are instinctively opposed to a constitution drawn up by the military and they are correct. Rapid elections are needed. However, a democratic parliament that involves people from below is also needed, as is a programme to tackle economic questions giving rise to such strife and sectarianism at grassroots level.

Giving dates for elections does not impress me or the Egyptian people because elections were held under President Mubarak. The problem was that the Mubarak clique continued to rule with an iron fist. All political opposition was suppressed violently. Giving dates for elections means nothing, therefore; it is a charade while the military clique retains power which it uses to crush political opposition. It is necessary for the Government to publicly condemn the military's repression of the democracy movement, call in the ambassador to demand that the military regime state it will relinquish power to the civil authorities and identify a date this year. This includes releasing political prisoners and bringing the suppression of the protests to an end.

The Government should also call in the Saudi ambassador. The Minister of State referred to groups of thugs attacking Coptic Christians; they are being financed by elements of the Saudi regime. There is a conspiracy involving certain forces in the region, backed up by the United States, which do not wish to see a genuine democracy in Egypt. I appeal to the Government to show publicly that it is on the side of the people by making concrete demands to bring about the realisation of the aims of the democratic revolution in Egypt.

The question for Ireland, the European Union and the wider international community is how best we can support the Egyptian people along the path towards full and a genuine democracy. The first step in that process is the holding of parliamentary elections which are scheduled to take place next Monday. The Government has committed €250,000 to the United Nations' development programme to support the electoral process in Egypt in the coming months and help to create a genuine and deep democracy that is respectful of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

High Representative Ashton was the first major international figure to visit Egypt. She went to listen to the Egyptian people about how the European Union could support Egypt's transition to democracy. The Union has promised greater political association, economic integration, mobility and financial support for Egypt and other countries experiencing democratic transition in return for real reforms. It has made available €350 million until the end of next year to support the process of democratisation and the achievement of economic growth throughout the region.

It is for Egyptians to determine their future. In partnership with the European Union, Ireland can continue to accompany the Egyptian people in their praiseworthy efforts to build what we all want to see, a democratic Egypt, in order that its people can fulfil the basic aspiration of a better life and have the opportunity to fulfil their potential.

The Minister of State should call in the ambassador and ask him to stop the killing of people on the streets of Cairo.

We will assist the process in a pragmatic fashion to enable capacity building. We are putting our money where our mouth is to support the Egyptian people.

Building Regulations

The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, has absolutely no excuse for refusing to meet the residents of Priory Hall. He offered the excuse that related issues were before the courts. He also claimed that it was solely a matter for Dublin City Council. Neither of these excuses is valid. There is nothing in law and no court order to stop the Minister from sitting down with residents to address the issues involved. If it was occurring in his constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny, he would be talking to or meeting them outside the gates of Leinster House, irrespective of whether a Supreme Court appeal was pending. Mr. Justice Kearns, President of the High Court, has stated the various branches of government, including the Department and the city council, should be putting their heads together to find a solution.

This issue is bigger than Dublin City Council. It is a national issue, with implications for planning and development, fire safety regulations, on-site building inspections and the functions of local and central government. In court counsel for Dublin City Council stated responsibility lay with the Department. However, the Minister has said it lies with the city council. The Priory Hall evacuees are being kicked like a football between the two agencies. Hundreds of people have had to be evacuated from Priory Hall and are living in emergency accommodation. They do not know what the immediate or long-term future holds for them. They have received widespread support from people across the city and the country, including from individuals disgusted at the conduct of the corrupt developer, Tom McFeely of Coalport, and the failure of the system of regulation and enforcement that allowed this disaster to happen.

It is shameful that the residents of Priory Hall have been refused a meeting with the Minister. They had to protest outside the gates of Leinster House yesterday and some colleagues and I joined them in solidarity. They should not have had to picket to demand a meeting with the Minister.

I would also like the Minister and the Taoiseach to step up to the plate, as I said on the Order of Business. We need a senior Government figure, particularly the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, to become directly involved. I also met a delegation from Priory Hall yesterday. I sensed their grave anxiety as they wondered whether they would be homeless for Christmas and what would happen about their mortgages and the payment of rent. We are in a legal no man's land between the High Court and the Supreme Court. People are concerned that the buildings were damaged when Thomas McFeely went in to undertake some remediation works, as one block has been left exposed to the elements.

What can the Minister tell us about the discussions that have taken place with Dublin City Council? The city council keeps telling us that it is in daily contact with the Department. It is incumbent, therefore, on the Minister and the Taoiseach to take a hands-on approach.

Most of the residents do not want to go back to Priory Hall. They want a solution. Owner-occupiers bought apartments in good faith; they were robbed of their life savings and submitted to taking out huge loans. They were left in a dreadful position. Those who privately rent are in a similar position. Effectively, they have been left homeless.

During the hearing in the High Court Mr. Justice Kearns repeatedly drew attention to the severe plight of the 240 residents and stated the behaviour of Dublin City Council "beggars belief" because the council had launched a torpedo but did not have the wherewithal to make alternative plans to remediate the complex, carry out repairs and rehouse residents. Ms Sineád Power, one of the leading members of the Priory Hall committee, continually says that because of the liaison between Dublin City Council and the Department, this is a political issue. Repeatedly in court barristers representing the council and others this situation requires a political solution. I pay tribute to Mr. Justice Nicholas Kearns of the High Court for his diligence, legal clarity and empathy with the people. He is a recommendation for the Judiciary.

I will respond to this issue on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government.

Dublin City Council is the designated authority with powers to enforce the statutory requirements arising under the Fire Safety Act, the Building Control Acts and the Planning and Development Acts, all of which are at issue in relation to Priory Hall. The council is also the designated housing authority under the Housing Acts. The Minister and the Department must respect the independence of the designated statutory authority in these matters and cannot interfere in individual cases. The Minister's responsibility is to ensure that appropriate statutory requirements, technical standards and administrative provisions are put in place under the various Acts. This responsibility has been fulfilled and is not in dispute. The Minister has no role in enforcement activity or the direct provision of housing services.

Residents at Priory Hall and their representatives have previously been advised of this clear division of responsibilities. The consistent advice given has been that the appropriate statutory powers in this case rest with Dublin City Council and that neither the Minister nor the Department has a statutory function in enforcement activity or in determining the provision of services in individual cases. This is and will remain the position. While this may be a source of disappointment to the residents, it is important that the Minister act appropriately and within his powers, particularly in cases such as this which are already the subject of legal proceedings.

Notwithstanding this clear division of responsibilities, the Department is being been kept informed by Dublin City Council of developments with regard to the resolution of issues at Priory Hall. At the Minister's request, the Department has assisted the council, in consultation with NAMA, in securing alternative housing for many of the residents. The overriding priority is to ensure the optimum outcome for the households concerned and to facilitate as early as possible a return to their own homes. In this respect it will be necessary to ensure that these homes are made fit for purpose and that the costs of so doing fall where they should. The Minister has asked Dublin City Council to do all within its powers to achieve this objective and has asked the Department to continue to liaise closely with Dublin City Council in this regard.

The Minister believes that Dublin City Council deserves much credit for the efforts it has made on behalf of the affected residents and he urges the Council to continue to meet and communicate with the residents and to take all reasonable steps to support them while they are vulnerable. The legal proceedings relating to Priory Hall are continuing and it would be entirely inappropriate to anticipate their conclusion.

On the North Fringe, specific responsibility for the planning and delivery of this development rests with the local authorities involved, Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council.

The residents merely requested a meeting with the Minister in order that they can tell him first-hand of the problems they are encountering. They were not asking him to interfere in the courts procedure but to listen to their problems. They are still paying mortgages. In some cases there is a three month moratorium but what will happen after three months? Mr. McFeely has damaged the properties in one block, which is now completely exposed since Dublin City Council had him removed from the site.

What will Dublin City Council do about the building control investigation that was completed on 16 November? What other non-fire issues is the council aware of because there is no doubt there are other examples, such as Balgaddy. Dublin City Council, in appealing the High Court's order to provide accommodation to residents, is causing people to fear that they will be left homeless. These people must get a guarantee that they will not be left homeless no matter what happens. Christmas is coming and people are terrified of where they will end up.

I also ask the Minister of State if the Government credit committee met to discuss the owner occupiers and if a case was made on the extension of the three month mortgage moratorium.

There are two reports the public has not seen, the Hayes Higgins report and the building control report. Does the Minister of State know if there will be legal action on foot of the building control report? Has Dublin City Council given a breakdown of the costs of accommodation, legal costs and the total bill to the council and, therefore, to the State and the people we represent for this mess at Priory Hall?

The developer, Mr. Tom McFeely, owns 68 of the properties in the complex. Does the Minister know if any negotiations on those properties are under way whereby they could be made part of any contribution the developer must make to rebuild the complex? Given that people were defrauded here, has the Government requested the National Bureau of Fraud Investigation or the Criminal Assets Bureau to look into this to see how the public interest may be progressed?

On Deputy Ellis's suggestion that the Minister meet the residents to be made aware of the issues that have arisen in Priory Hall, I assure him he is more than aware of all of the problems arising at Priory Hall. The Department will liaise with the city council on an ongoing basis to ensure the optimum outcome for the households concerned and to facilitate as quickly as possible a return to their homes or, as was suggested in the earlier debate, an alternative to returning, whichever is the most reasonable and optimum outcome for the households concerned.

Substantial works must be undertaken before that can happen and the city council is making every effort to achieve this objective. I urge all concerned in Dublin City Council to deal with the situation in line with the standard arrangements in place for the discharge of their statutory functions. Given that the matter is now in the hands of the High Court and moving on to the Supreme Court, it is important for all concerned to await the outcome of the court's deliberation.

Since taking office, the Minister has clearly signalled consumer protection in the area of quality construction of new dwellings is a priority for him. In this regard, he announced in July a number of measures to be advanced by his Department and local authorities with a view to improving compliance with and oversight of the requirements of the building regulations.

Deputy Ellis mentioned that there may be other issues in other developments across Dublin and elsewhere. On that basis, the Minister will introduce mandatory certification and improved inspection arrangements as key reforms that will be in place early next year and will improve the quality of buildings while ensuring problems like that those that arose at Priory Hall will never arise again.

The Minister has publicly articulated his views on the role played by construction professionals and industry interests in certifying the building works at priory hall and he finds it dismaying to witness the lack of attention being paid to this aspect of the problem by commentators in general.

Deputy Broughan asked about the mortgage moratorium being considered by the credit committee. I will ask about that and come back to the Deputy on the issue. All avenues are being pursued to ensure any costs arising from the cases and for repairs to the building so homeowners can return, will be reclaimed from those responsible for getting us into this sad and sorry mess in the first place. If there is any other information that can be provided to the Deputies, I undertake to get it to them as quickly as possible.

Top
Share