Topical Issue Debate

Flood Prevention Measures

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

I thank the Minister of State for being present to reply on this matter. Over recent months the Minister and his officials have kept the Dáil and the relevant Oireachtas committee well informed regarding the work the Department is doing to tackle the issue of what will happen to communities whose homes have been flooded regularly, most recently in October and November last year. The updates have centred on two areas. The first is the physical work that has been done by both the Department and the local authorities on preventative measures to ensure either that the areas will not flood or the risk of them being flooded is massively reduced. The other area is one on which the Minister has been working, the discussions taking place between the Department and the insurance industry.

I will outline the situation in which many of my constituents find themselves.

They are resident in areas that have been flooded but where the council has carried out flood repairs. The insurance companies, however, still will not insure them. Many of them now find themselves being hit by a triple whammy. The first is that they have been flooded regularly in the past, and the fear of it happening again in future remains. Often it is more than a fear; it is a possibility. The second is that many of them now, because of the point when they bought their houses and what has since happened, have seen the values of their homes being massively affected. The third problem is that they cannot get house insurance. They love their homes and are proud of their communities but the values of their properties have fallen dramatically. They cannot get house insurance and if any of them wanted to sell, which most do not, they would not be able to do so.

Dublin City Council is working on many of the flood prevention measures so what options are open to people in areas where work has been done or is planned but insurers refuse to provide insurance? In such a situation we should be able to perform some sort of role to ensure these people are given the protection they deserve. It is not their fault they are being flooded. It is a result of action that was taken elsewhere.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes)

I thank the Deputy for raising this very important matter. I am well aware of the impact that flooding has on businesses and householders. Having visited affected areas this summer, I am aware of the hardship and loss suffered as a result of flooding.

Most people are reliant on their insurance policies to protect them against the worst of the financial cost and loss arising. In this regard, I remain aware of the difficulties some people have been experiencing in securing insurance cover for flood risk at affordable prices or at all. Insurance companies make their own assessment of risk in any particular case. However, in areas where flood defence and alleviation works have been carried out, I cannot accept that any property protected by significant public capital investment would not be able to receive a quotation for insurance at reasonable cost. I have been engaged on this issue for some time now and I have made it clear recently that I am somewhat frustrated with the rate at which progress is being made in coming to an agreement with the Irish Insurance Federation, IIF, and the industry.

I first met with the industry in March 2012 and I had a very constructive engagement with it about the scope and scale of the work undertaken by the OPW on flood risk management, on the alleviation schemes being undertaken in many of our large cities and towns and, in particular, on the mapping of areas subject to flood risk nationally which will emerge from the OPW's catchment flood risk assessment and management programme. I indicated then that I wished to see an agreement reached as quickly as possible between the OPW and the IIF on a sustainable system of information sharing particularly for locations vulnerable to flooding and for identifying flood alleviation schemes and works completed and where the standard of protection afforded by these works could be verified.

While this may seem to be a straightforward matter, there are complex technical issues involved concerning the design standards and risk levels of defence works and the impact of those works in reducing the risk of flooding. Officials in the OPW have been working on developing a system for presenting information on flood defence schemes to the insurance industry to meet the technical requirements set out by the industry for risk assessment purposes. On 5 July 2012, the OPW made a presentation to the IIF and a number of the main insurance companies on a proposed template for providing the required information. The essential focus and objective of OPW's work has been in putting flood defence information on a GIS platform. This means the information will be accessible and viewable in a mapping environment and via the Internet.

The demonstration of the system at the meeting on 5 July showed examples of flood protected areas of Clonmel and Ennis. The areas identified are protected by flood relief schemes carried out by the OPW or local authorities. These areas are generally protected against a flood that has a probability of occurring of 1% in any one year. The maps will be presented on a web viewer with a link to details of the scheme design, including a design report, environmental impact study, if one was carried out, and scheme drawings.

Following the presentation on 5 July, the OPW wrote to the IIF on 19 July providing it with detailed information in template form on the schemes mentioned and requesting that it disseminate this information to its member companies with a view to getting feedback and comment on the proposed template. I understand the IIF has indicated in recent days that it is in the process of collating the responses it has received from its members on the OPW information and it hopes to be in a position shortly to formally respond on this.

I look forward to receiving the IIF response and I very much hope that it will be positive and allow for speedy agreement on the format of the information to be provided by the OPW. There may be some technical details to be ironed out but I would hope that these can be resolved quickly. With the agreement of the IIF, the OPW will then be in a position to progress with its work on compiling the information on other flood defence schemes that have been completed. This will take some time as there is a lot of detail to be sorted through. The focus initially will be on compiling information on the main schemes that have been carried out since 1995 when the current programme of major flood works began.

I acknowledge the insurance industry's engagement on this important matter. There is no question but that the industry has suffered substantial losses from major flood events in recent years. In its presentation to the joint committee, the IIF indicated that the cumulative cost of the eight major flood events since the year 2000 has been €697 million. Against that, however, must be balanced the very significant investment made by the State in major urban flood defence schemes since 1995 and the huge benefit deriving from that investment in terms of properties protected and losses avoided. It is estimated that almost 8,000 properties have been protected to date and the value of the benefit deriving from that is of the order of €800 million. The State, therefore, is certainly doing its part to mitigate the impact of flooding and I can assure the Deputy and the House that the Government and I will continue to do so in so far as resources allow.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive response. Many of the communities I represent such as Cabra, East Wall, North Wall, Clonliffe Road and Ballybough, despite the works that have taken place or that are promised, cannot get insurance for their homes. Any day there is rain like there was on Sunday, the first people I think of are those who live in homes that are not protected from flood risks who then face the nightmare of not having any support if they are flooded. The Minister of State made a key point: it is not just that they cannot get insurance, it is that they cannot get it at any price. I urge the Minister of State to do everything in his power to bring those discussions to a close so residents in areas at risk will see a framework being put in place.

Deputy Brian Hayes

I thank the Deputy for his constructive comments in this debate. For an agreement to be reached, two parties much come together. The State wants that agreement because it is in the interests of the State to establish a written protocol with the insurance industry on the standard of work we have put in place, which is to a minimum of a 100 year event, meaning the works on flood defences will withstand even such an event. We will stand over the work we do; it requires other third parties in the private sector to accept what we are saying. The Deputy will appreciate the frustration I feel in this matter.

The first task is to agree a template of information that at least we are all agreeing with the information being provided, in other words, what we have done since 1995 in terms of major flood alleviation works in urban centres is guaranteed to withstand a 100 year event should such an event occur. Once we have an agreement in that regard and once they accept that I would hope, at the minimum, the insurance companies would provide cover to those areas where major urban capital infrastructure investment has gone in for those flood mitigating projects. I cannot demand with a gun that they do that; I cannot demand that they form an agreement with that because these are private sector companies which argue to me that they have seen substantial losses as a result of the flooding events in recent years but we will continue to work at it.

I use the opportunity provided by this debate to tell the insurance companies that I am frustrated at the lack of progress and that if we have not come to an agreement with them concerning the template of information, we can at least share at a platform level between the federation and ourselves. I want to bring these matters to a conclusion as soon as possible and if people are not prepared to agree, they should say so but to continue at a distance while people cannot get cover is an appalling situation. I fully appreciate and sympathise with the situation the Deputy and his constituents face as it is replicated in many parts of the country. It is one thing not to have insurance cover when one is waiting for works to be done, but it is another to say that there should be no insurance cover where substantial investment has been made by the State. I continue to work with the Irish Insurance Federation and the companies affected to bring them to the table and negotiate a fair settlement on this matter.

School Transport Provision

Deputy Joe O'Reilly

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this issue which is of considerable importance not only to two families in my constituency, but to young adults in general who may have a disability. It concerns the need for the Department of Education and Skills to show flexibility in the use of transportation for young adults from Cavan who are attending Midway Services in County Meath, bearing in mind paragraph 4.13 on page 66 of the Value for Money and Policy Review of Disability Services in Ireland which states: "Service providers should examine the possibility of sharing transport resources on a cost neutral basis with other local service providers/community groups taking into account the recent announcement of plans for the Department of Transport to integrate local transport services."

Recently I was contacted by two families in Cavan, both of whom have an 18 year old daughter with an intellectual disability. Both recently turned 18 years of age, graduated from St. Ultan's secondary school in Navan and are attending Midway Services, also in Navan, County Meath. While attending St. Ultan's secondary school, both availed of transport on a Bus Éireann school bus from their homes to school. The Department of Education and Skills has deemed both ineligible to avail of the service as they are 18 years of age and deemed to be adults and no longer in mainstream education.

It is the intention of the two families that the two young women will use public transportation on their own in the short term but the parents and support workers at Midway Services agree it will be some time before they will be able to travel unaccompanied. This proposal is a temporary solution only. In the interim, the hope is that both could continue to travel to Midway Services on the Bus Éireann school bus. Both of them used this bus service previously when they attended St. Ultan's secondary school until May 2012 before turning 18.

The bus travels past their houses every day with empty seats. I understand there may be some concerns around child protection given that they are 18 years of age. As the bus driver is an adult and there is an adult escort on the bus, the two young women are not deemed by professionals to be threatening to children, quite the contrary. As they know the children on the bus, having previously travelled on it, and are from the community, this makes no sense and is grossly insulting. It was a practice in the past to do this. On one previous occasion in my constituency a young woman in a similar situation was allowed to avail of the school transport scheme from her home to an adult day service in County Meath. As a goodwill gesture, the Department and the Health Service Executive allowed this to take place. The sharing of services took place in the good days in the times of plenty, but in times of economic restriction and constraint it is proposed to do the opposite and to pile up the costs.

The parents of one of those two young women have other young children, are both working out of economic necessity and are not in a position to drive the children. The parents of the other young woman are elderly. The mother is awaiting hospitalisation for serious issues and they are not in a position to take the children to Midway Services. It defies logic that a bus travels past their houses which they would have used a few months ago, that the seats are available and that it is only proposed to allow them travel as a interim solution. It defies all natural justice and is discriminatory, wrong and bizarre.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Ciarán Cannon)

I thank the Deputy for raising the matter.

School transport is a very significant operation managed by Bus Éireann on the Department's behalf and covering over 82 million kilometres annually. Approximately 114,000 children, including more than 8,000 children with special educational needs, were transported in the last school year on a daily basis to schools throughout the country. This network involves approximately 4,000 vehicles covering over 82 million kilometres annually.

A primary objective of the school transport scheme is to support the transport to and from school of children who would have difficulty travelling for reasons of distance to their nearest school if transport is not supported and to date this has been the sole focus of that scheme. While I recognise the need for flexibility in the use of transportation, this is a complex matter and a number of critical factors must be borne in mind. In the first instance, school transport vehicles are routed and timetabled to coincide with school opening and closing times and existing contract arrangements with private sector providers are framed along these lines. In this context, it is significant that some 85% of school transport provision is now provided by private sector operators on foot of contracts with Bus Éireann. Bus Éireann is operating a process of rolling out five year contracts to maximise value for money and security of provision.

A further significant factor to be considered in the integration of school transport services is child protection. I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that the opening up of school transport services to adults would have serious risks if it were to be contemplated. My colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Alan Kelly, and I are together looking closely at the issue of integrated rural transport provision and in that context the National Transport Authority has assumed a role in this area. I understand that proposals are being developed by a working group involving representatives of my Department and the Departments of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Social Protection and the Environment, Community and Local Government, Bus Éireann, the Health Service Executive and others. I consider this is the most appropriate way of advancing this agenda and dealing with the type of issues I have outlined.

Deputy Joe O'Reilly

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I appreciate he is working on the local brief he received. I appeal to him to revisit a couple of issues. The issue of timing does not arise because the professional personnel at Midway Services, where the young adults who have an intellectual disability attend, will collect them from the bus. The local bus driver and helpers have no issue. Therefore, that is a non issue. I appreciate the Minister received the briefing and did not write it. The young adults in question are very benign people who have a good profile and the professionals who work with them are convinced that, contrary to being a threat to children, they are great friends of the local children and travelled previously with them until they reached the age of 18 years. Only a couple of months ago they travelled on the same bus with the same young people from their community and now they are barred from travelling on the bus.

While I appreciate the Minister of State's response, I appeal that common sense, natural justice, Christianity and ordinary human values should apply here. The Minister of State should revisit the brief, go to the people who wrote the script and say, "Sad, but we are about people and this is reality".

Deputy Ciarán Cannon

The case the Deputy raised has prompted the Minister of State, Deputy Kelly, and I to look closely at the suggestion the Deputy is making. We have established a working group between my Department, the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, and the HSE to investigate how we can best use our scarce resources for transport in all rural areas. This would encompass school transport, rural transport and patient transport. Although we are early in that process, significant possible savings have been identified as well as a possible enhancement of the service available to people in rural areas.

The Deputy is suggesting an interim, piecemeal and ad hoc change to our school transport system, which would not be the wisest approach. We need to consider the matter in an integrated fashion. If we are to amend the school transport and rural transport systems, it needs to be done in a careful and considered manner given that it is a very complex operation, transporting 114,000 children to and from school each day. The Deputy's concerns and suggestions to amalgamate transport for people in rural areas will be considered as we continue along the process of hopefully providing school transport and rural transport systems that best serve the needs of people in rural areas.

Deputy Joe O'Reilly

On a point of information, this is a school bus on the M3, the motorway to Dublin. While I really welcome the rural transport initiative, it would not apply in this case.

Deputy Ciarán Cannon

We are investigating all possibilities for integrating and amalgamating transport. It would include school transport for the young people to whom the Deputy has referred. Distinct possibilities are opening up in the areas he suggests, but it needs to be done in a considered and careful way across the school transport system, rather than on an ad hoc basis.

NAMA Portfolio Value

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank the office of the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter this evening. I also thank the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, for coming to the Chamber personally to respond. I could commend the Minister of State on the many actions she has taken on since she acquired this brief, but as I have only four minutes I will deal with the matter at hand, which is the consideration, if any, that has been given to instituting a rent-to-buy scheme for NAMA residential properties for first-time buyers and prospective owner-occupiers.

The Government has two clearly identifiable tasks related to home ownership and both relate to normalising the residential property market. First, we need to deal with people who have bought homes and find themselves in financial distress. We have seen actions arising from the Keane report, the most significant of which is the Personal Insolvency Bill, at present before the House. However, we also need to look to the present and the future and create a normalised residential property market, which does not favour investment over the purchase of a home, as we witnessed in the bubble years. Despite the difficulties in the residential property market in recent years, we will continue to be a home-buying nation. In future people will continue to have the ambition to live in a home they own.

At present, NAMA has 14,000 residential properties in the State, 9,000 of which are being rented. I propose the introduction of a rent-to-buy programme to deal with these NAMA properties. A structured plan and scheme should be examined in conjunction with NAMA to make that happen. People interested in purchasing a home have two concerns. First, they are concerned over whether house prices will continue to drop and, second, they are concerned about the security of their jobs and incomes. The Government has taken action on the house prices, with the implementation of the residential property price register database a number of weeks ago, which gives clarity and a degree of certainty to that issue. Obviously that needs adjustment to give more clarity as to the property type - whether it is a flat, a house or an apartment, the number of bedrooms and the floor area - because at the moment it just gives an address.

There is also the issue of salary security, and the option of a rent-to-buy programme would allow people, who are paying rent which is the equivalent of a mortgage, to do so over a period of two to three years and the rent, accruing over a period of time, would act as a deposit, which would also deal with the issue of loan to value. Since 2009 the Central Bank has correctly tightened up on the lending practices of the past. It also needs to tighten up on loan-to-value requirements, along with the required income levels for those who are purchasing. Over a two to three year period, people in a position to pay market rents in a rent-to-buy programme should be able to achieve loan-to-value percentages of 90% to 95%.

NAMA would be also beneficiaries of such a proposal. NAMA has estates throughout the country, some of which are category 3 ghost estates which means they require a minimum amount of adjustment to take them out of the ghost estate ranking. However, they require maintenance and security. By putting into those estates residents, who had the intention of purchasing those homes over a number of years, we would establish communities, the dereliction of these sites would be halted and the existing cost of security on these sites could be used to get them corrected. We would succeed in normalising the housing market by putting in place a robust rent-to-by programme with proper lending practices. It would deal with a housing crisis that will arise in a few years with a young population and an ongoing demand for property purchase into the future that will need to be met. Why not meet that demand now with the 14,000 NAMA properties, 9,000 of which are being rented. Surely we should try to get those rented properties purchased.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Jan O'Sullivan)

I thank the Deputy for making this suggestion. I need to give my reply in the context of the Government's 2011 housing policy statement, which is quite explicit in taking a tenure-neutral approach to housing. That is, we will work towards enabling households to access the type of housing that best suits their needs at a point in time. Part of the function of the National Asset Management Agency, as a major holder of residential property stock, is to make a contribution to the social and economic development of the State. In this regard, the delivery of a social dividend from its stock of residential properties is a key challenge that Government has set the agency. While progress in this regard has not been as fast as hoped for, it has identified 2,000 units that may match well with my Department's social housing leasing initiative that is being rolled out in conjunction with the approved housing body sector.

The residential mortgage initiative product launched by NAMA this year may have a role in facilitating people who want and can afford to buy to realise their home ownership aspirations. However, there is a fine line between facilitating and enticing. I have no issue with facilitating, but we need to be careful with enticing because we cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the recent past.

While I have no function in respect of the commercial activities of the agency, a responsibility which rests with my colleague, the Minister for Finance, I believe a rent-to-buy scheme could have merit. I again thank the Deputy for raising the issue in the context of the provision of housing that meets individual needs at a point in time. Such a scheme could provide a housing solution to households, with the possibility, but not the legal obligation, of progressing to purchase at a point in the future.

The Deputy may be aware that in 2010 my Department launched a rent-to-buy scheme in the Dublin City Council area specifically to facilitate Dublin City Council to deploy unsold affordable housing units in its stock. Under this scheme, the applicant will rent the property for up to three years, with an option to purchase at any time during this term at an agreed affordable purchase price. A percentage of the rent paid can be used as a deposit towards the purchase of the property. At the end of this three-year period, the applicant has the choice of proceeding or not with the purchase. While the fact that this scheme provides an opportunity for eligible households to test drive home-ownership for a few years without the fear of getting caught out by fluctuations in the housing market is not its main aim, there are still some very real advantages in it for individual households.

Taking this into account, I will raise the topic under discussion with my colleague, the Minister for Finance, as another potential housing market intervention by NAMA. I compliment Deputy Lynch, who always thinks outside the box, on coming up with this practical proposal. As I stated, I will take it to the Minister for Finance, who is the relevant Minister dealing with NAMA in this regard.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank the Minister of State for her explicit response. Often, what we get are scripted responses to Topical Issues. It is obvious this evening that the Minister of State has given her attention to the issue I have raised.

The Minister of State referred to the 80:20 scheme introduced by NAMA, which is a welcome development that allows people to purchase a home at 80% of its value and which provides that where a property loses 20% of its value, the purchaser will realise it over a period of his or her mortgage. The Minister of State also set out the Department's policy in terms of it remaining neutral on this issue and in regard to the concept of enticing people into making purchases when it might not be suitable for them. While I concur with the Minister of State's sentiments on this, the fact remains that Ireland will remain a home purchasing nation for those who can afford to do so and therein lies the nub of the issue, namely, what is determined as affordability. In my view, house prices have almost reached the point of normalisation, namely, that they now cost three to four times the rate of annual income. The average price of a house countrywide is currently three to four times the annual national industrial wage.

Another issue that arises is that of social dividend and NAMA's responsibility in this regard. I am aware that the Department has delivered housing options for homeless agencies and through the 80:20 scheme. However, in terms of dealing with enticement of concerns, we are now presented with a unique opportunity in terms of the lending model applied in the rent-to-buy scheme being robustly structured to reflect the lending criteria set out in 2009 by the Central Bank, which acknowledged the mistakes of the past when people were permitted to include overtime pay, secondary rental income and so on into the equation when applying for mortgages, resulting in purchasing prices in some parts of the country increasing from two to three times a person's income to ten to 12 times his or her income.

I note the Minister of State's undertaking to take up this matter with the Minister, Deputy Hogan. Members of this House are experiencing difficulty engaging with NAMA owing to how the NAMA legislation is drafted. On one occasion I had to obtain senior counsel advice because of the manner in which NAMA is structured. I believe some engagement should take place with NAMA at departmental level, be it the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government or the Department of Finance, in regard to the stock which it has in hand, some of which may not be saleable or may be in remote locations. There are NAMA estates on the periphery of Cork city which, if normalisation of the market occurred, could become attractive to purchasers. The scheme I am promoting this evening is for first-time buyers and owner-occupiers rather than investors.

I ask that the Minister of State request NAMA to examine what stock it has in hand which, in terms of location and affordability, would be attractive to purchasers on a 20 to 25 year term rather than the 30 to 35 year term witnessed in the past and to ensure that the mortgage product put in place and structure of same would be such that it would be sustainable and would, in the context of prospective purchases, be reflective of the rent they are currently paying in these properties.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

As Minister of State with responsibility for housing, my main objective is to provide options for people in the context of fairness and choice using the various vehicles at our disposal. NAMA is a player in this regard. The Deputy referred to the 80:20 scheme. We also engage with people through the social housing scheme. A social dividend has been written into the NAMA legislation. NAMA also has a commercial mandate. However, I believe its commercial mandate and social dividend can tie in with each other, resulting in a win-win situation in terms of the role given to NAMA under the legislation.

The Deputy's suggestions should and will be brought to the attention of NAMA. In terms of policy, the relevant Minister is the Minister for Finance. I will also bring the Deputy's suggestion to his attention. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, and I also meet with NAMA in regard to the transfer of social houses. NAMA has decided to establish a special purpose vehicle in order to speed up that process. The Deputy's suggestion is worthy of consideration. What we all want to achieve is as many options as possible for people who need a home. There is much merit in the Deputy's proposal, for which I thank him.

Priory Hall Development

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Last Saturday, I walked with more than 1,000 citizens in Donaghmede, Dublin 13, which is in my constituency, to mark the first anniversary of the traumatic evacuation of Priory Hall residents from their homes in October 2011 owing to the profound fire safety and other defects discovered in that complex. I again pay tribute to the Priory Hall residents and their families for their ongoing, outstanding and dignified campaign for justice.

On Saturday, we heard powerful testimonies from some of the resident leaders, including Graham Usher, Stephanie Meehan, Sínead Power and Darren Kelly, in regard to the horrific ongoing suffering of the Priory Hall families. For example, Stephanie detailed the awful impact on her two young children of being evacuated from their home, spending Christmas 2011 as refugees in their own country. Incredibly, Priory Hall families are now facing a second Christmas out of their homes, with the future as uncertain as ever.

No remediation work has been carried out since last November, even though at the time of the evacuation residents were told that they would be back in their homes in about five weeks. I also spoke last Saturday to some of the parents and grandparents of Priory Hall residents who never imagined their children and grandchildren being treated so badly. As pointed out yesterday by Graham Usher in a letter to The Irish Times, residents have faced a 12 month battle with the developer Tom McFeely, Dublin City Council, the Government and the banks. Graham rightly calls Priory Hall "a failure of the State". I note that Mr. McFeely was in court again today in relation to breaches of court orders and the non-disclosure of assets.

The key question is when will the resolution process be concluded? That was the question on everyone's lips at the public demonstration last Saturday. The threat of Dublin City Council's Supreme Court case on the withdrawal of families' accommodation still looms. Residents also point out that if they currently have a moratorium on their mortgage, the capital interest on it is accelerating all the time. This could be horrifically compounded if residents are left in negative equity, with a huge mortgage on an unsafe and unsaleable home. It was also reported in The Irish Times last Saturday that Dublin City Council has spent €2 million on the Priory Hall debacle, including a reported €700,000 on security. One year on, residents are in a worse position than ever. When will we know the result of the resolution process and when will it be possible for the families with Priory Hall to move on with their lives?

Deputy Barry Cowen

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this Topical Issue for discussion. We never thought that a year on we would be making the same case for these people who have been to hell in relation to this issue.

It appears that over the past 12 months the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, has passed the buck on Priory Hall and these people remain abandoned as far as we can ascertain. As Deputy Broughan stated, we reiterate the fact we want the Minister to meet the residents to discuss funding mechanisms for the remedial works and help find a permanent solution to the current plight of the 260 residents, many of whom are paying hefty mortgages on uninhabitable homes. Without doubt, this must be addressed.

The Minister stated he has not met the residents because of ongoing legal proceedings, that he must respect the independence of the designated authority, Dublin City Council, and that he cannot interfere in individual cases. Based on the failure of all parties and those in officialdom to address this issue, the time has long since passed to bring about a resolution. The conciliation process must be brought to a conclusion. If this means interference by the Minister with responsibility in this regard, then let this be the case.

On a related issue, on the day when local government reform has been published by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, we have not seen the appointment of a planning regulator, as was Judge Mahon's wish. In recent years we have not seen proper funding put in place to augment, help and support enforcement officers in local authorities whose role could be that bit more real were they to have the resources to pursue planning, development, health and safety and building control regulations, which is their remit. I plead with the Minister to reconsider the appointment of a planning regulator to enforce proper procedures and guidelines on planning throughout the local government sector.

Deputy Mick Wallace

I am shocked the Minister is hiding behind a legal process. The conciliation process is not good enough. A year is a long time for people to live in a nightmare. Regardless of whether the Minister accepts it, the State bears a huge responsibility in the matter. To say regulations are not good enough does not cut a lot of ice. The regulations in Ireland are decent and it is the lack of enforcement which is the problem. If the current arrangements had been adhered to in a proper manner, Priory Hall would not have happened. Local authorities are empowered to carry out inspections and, where necessary, undertake enforcement action to ensure compliance. Local authorities did not have the resources to do so, and this is a Government issue. The Government must take responsibility but even if it grabbed the bull by the horns and dealt with it, many people are responsible. There is the builder, the engineer, the consultant engineer, the architect, the mechanical and electrical contractors and specialist subcontractors. All of these people had insurance. Perhaps one cannot get any money from the builder at this stage, but other people have a responsibility and the issue needs to be co-ordinated by the Government. The issue must be tackled.

The fact that there was no enforcement of the regulations by the local authority is the crucial issue. There is no point in looking at a building when the curtains are hanging. One does not know what has happened because it is all covered up at that stage and it is too late. We do not need to change the regulations - we need to change the way the rules are enforced. If a consultant engineer and architect are to take responsibility for work carried out in their name, it must be supervised by somebody working for them. If this costs money then they should charge it to the builder. The current arrangement is nonsense and the Government must act on it and change it. The regulations are fine, but the lack of enforcement is a killer and is what is causing the problem. The Government bears a huge responsibility for what happened at Priory Hall and the Minister has not taken responsibility for it. He is too keen to kick it down the road and state there is a legal process. A year later it is a nightmare for the people involved and it is not good enough. The Government would interfere in other issues where it suits them. It needs to interfere in this.

Deputy Clare Daly

Like the other Deputies, I believe Priory Hall has become a symbol of what is best and worst in Irish society. We have a community of young families and parents banding together in solidarity to try to secure basic human rights in Ireland in 2012, but we also have a society which is effectively ignoring them, from the Government to the local authority to the banks and other agencies.

Like Deputy Broughan, I was there on Saturday and the deterioration in the structure since we were there a number of months ago is substantial. There is no going back. These people will not end up back in the community and nor should they be expected to return there. The only solution is to take it down and allow these people to rebuild their lives. It is an indictment of the banks, many of them publicly owned, that these people, who are evacuees from their homes living in inadequate accommodation which they cannot call their own, continue to pay mortgages for their property which is a health hazard. Some people have secured a moratorium but the interest is increasing. We as taxpayers, a Government and a Parliament who own these banks must step in. The mortgages should be transferred to a property of the choosing of the residents, be it in NAMA or somewhere else. Priory Hall is no more and these people will not return there.

I agree with the other Deputies that it is unacceptable that the Minister, Deputy Hogan, hid behind a court case between Mr. McFeely and Dublin City Council. It had nothing to do with the residents so he could have met them. After this he hid behind the conciliation process. This is not good enough. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, should meet the residents because the State is complicit. Successive Governments stood over self-certification and inadequate regulation and, crucially, inadequate enforcement. There will be no solution unless the Government takes ownership of this. In fairness, on Saturday residents were extremely critical of the role of the Government and the political establishment. To my mind they are correct. We need to take action. One year is far too long. This has become a symbol of other developments and it should not be happening here or anywhere else.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

I will reply to these issues on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan. I acknowledge the very difficult and distressing situation faced by the residents of Priory Hall who have been out of their homes for 12 months. I share the wishes of all concerned, and those who raised the issue in the Chamber, to see the matter resolved as quickly as possible.

A Supreme Court hearing on an appeal by Dublin City Council against an order to pay for accommodation, storage costs and ancillary costs of residents forced to vacate their apartments at Priory Hall had been scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 24 April 2012. However, on Friday, 20 April 2012, the Supreme Court agreed to adjourn these proceedings to allow for a conciliation process between the parties.

The conciliation process is being chaired by Mr. Justice Joseph Finnegan, a retired Judge of the Supreme Court and a former President of the High Court. I understand the resolution process, which seeks to identify a way forward to the complex problems at Priory Hall, remains ongoing between the relevant parties. I am not a party to the legal proceedings and I have no role or involvement in the conciliation process. Out of respect for the process approved by the Supreme Court, and for Mr. Justice Finnegan, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further. It is important that all concerned afford Mr. Justice Finnegan the opportunity to complete the task which he has been given. I cannot tell the House how long this process will take, and I ask Deputies to respect the process being undertaken by Mr. Justice Finnegan.

In his contribution, Deputy Broughan raised the pyrite issue, which I will also address. The pyrite report provides a comprehensive framework to move forward and provide effective solutions for home owners. The Minister's objective in setting up the pyrite panel was to assist home owners find a resolution to the pyrite problem, and his focus is now to ensure the recommendations are implemented in a way that delivers workable and practicable solutions for home owners.

Following receipt of the report of the independent pyrite panel in late June, the Minister met with the Construction Industry Federation, the Irish Concrete Federation, the Irish Insurance Federation, HomeBond and the Irish Banking Federation in July and outlined to them the pivotal role he believes they can play in providing a solution to the pyrite problem. All parties have now submitted their responses to the Minister's request for proposals for a voluntary industry-led solution for homeowners.

The Minister has made it abundantly clear on a number of occasions that in the absence of workable solutions from the stakeholders, he will consider an imposed solution along the lines recommended in the pyrite report. Recommendation 14 in the report recommends the establishment of a resolution board which could be funded by the construction, quarrying and related insurance sectors. The responses from the stakeholders are now being evaluated and together with the relevant recommendations in the pyrite report, will inform the development of proposals which will provide for a solution to the pyrite problem.

The report of the pyrite panel contains 24 recommendations and work is also progressing on the implementation of a number of other recommendations in the report. Recommendations in respect of the development of a mandatory certification system for buildings and a registration process for builders are currently being dealt with by the Department under the building control reform programme that the Minister announced last year. The Minister hopes to have revised building control regulations signed into law shortly. He has asked the National Standards Authority of Ireland to develop a testing and categorisation protocol for reactive pyrite in sub-floor hardcore material and a method statement to provide guidance for the remediation of pyrite-damaged dwellings and this work has already commenced. So work is being done for the future but, unfortunately, Priory Hall and other issues that have been raised arose out of the way building was carried out in the past and we must make sure that never happens again. Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to comment on what Justice Finnegan is doing and I do not have a timeframe in respect of it.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Joanna Tuffy)

We are running over time so I ask Members to be very brief.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

It is disappointing that the Minister of State does not have a timeframe and there is no framework. When this Dáil asks tribunals and other bodies to report, we usually give them a timeframe or ask for an interim report. People feel desolate at this stage. It is very hard to get across the sense of desolation people feel about being homeless. It is almost like something that would have happened after a war or in 1969 in parts of Northern Ireland. We really must try to get a result for them as soon as possible. One of the outstanding problems of this situation has been that the Minister has never met the people concerned and has refused to do so. Can we take it that even when we do have a resolution process decision, he will meet them? As Deputy Daly noted, the condition of the buildings is deteriorating day by day.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Joanna Tuffy)

The Deputy's time is up.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Is the Minister of State concerned by that? Has her Department and Dublin City Council liaised at all in respect of a cost-benefit analysis of either refurbishment or demolition? Martin Schulz, the President of the European Parliament and the leader of our party at European level, visited the Dáil last week.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Joanna Tuffy)

The Deputy is over time.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

He mentioned how important it is for architects, and an architect is in the Chamber right now, to be accompanied by psychologists. I note the comments made by Deputy Wallace because we did build many buildings that were grossly unsuitable, not just at Priory Hall but in other places as well. Will the Minister of State be coming forward with major legislation and a social housing programme for 2013?

Deputy Barry Cowen

I do not want to repeat the questions that have been asked by Deputy Broughan but I expect answers from the Minister in respect of the specific questions, namely, whether he will meet with the residents and show the sort of interest that should emanate from Government on this issue. Will the Minister of State respond to my query about the omission in today's announcement of local government reform of the appointment of a planning regulator, as was the wish of the Mahon tribunal? Has she any comment to make about the planning enforcement officers of local authorities throughout the country who cannot carry out the duties they were appointed to do by virtue of the lack of available funding through whatever guise, be it central Government funds or because their ability to raise funds themselves is not what it was some years ago? That being the case, how does she expect to address that issue? I am conscious that local authorities have been penalised in the third and fourth quarter in respect of central Government funds because of their inability to collect the household charge at the rate desired by the Government despite the fact the Government did not give them the tools to do that. Alternatively, had they been given advance notice, they might have done a better job than has been a case.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Joanna Tuffy)

The Deputy's time is up.

Deputy Mick Wallace

About nine months ago, I visited the building and looked over it. I brought a hammer and had a look at how things were done. To be honest, I was completely shocked. I could not believe that so many different sections could allow what happened to take place. I believe it cannot be made right and it is not possible to bring that development to the stage it should be at for the people who paid for it. Those buildings must be knocked down and rebuilt. People should remember that the banks sent people out there to check whether it was safe to part with the mortgage money they were providing and the development was certified. The banks received certification from that person who, more often than not, was somebody within the banking structure. They stood over what was out there. Do not ask me how they did this but, as a builder, I would not like the job of rebuilding it. I would like to build it from scratch, not repair it.

Deputy Clare Daly

The response from the Minister of State was disappointing. I am not being in any way disrespectful towards the judge involved in the process but that is not really the issue. Certainly, residents are not happy that the Government would hide behind this process and delay meeting them. There is no excuse and there is no contradiction preventing the Minister from meeting the residents because that process is underway. The reference to pyrite is a bit like hiding behind the non-answer that is there. This development, which probably cannot be repaired, is a health and safety deathtrap. One of the residents made the point on Saturday that Tom McFeely, rogue and all that he is, developed good buildings in Great Britain. He did so because he knew the British state would chase him and ensure that regulations were enforced. This State did not do so. We are culpable, the Minister is our representative and must meet these people and the State has to take a lead in dealing with this situation. The development should be knocked down, the banks which are our banks should be made pay a price in respect of that and the mortgages should be transferred to other properties to allow these people to move on with their lives. If we are here in another six months on this, it will be an absolute indictment of the Minister and Government.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

I will convey to the Minister the views expressed. The Government is not hiding behind anything but the fact is the judge has been appointed to do a job by the court and has specifically indicated that he wants to be given time to do that job. So we must be careful about what we say and allow him to do the job he has been given. I will certainly convey the views expressed and I believe, like other Members of the House, that the priority is to get people back into their homes if they are habitable as soon as possible and to ensure that those residents are the most important people in all of this. We in no way stand over what was done in the past. Terrible things were done in the construction industry in the past and we are trying to clean up that mess, which is why we are bringing forward new regulations and new ways of doing things.

The point made by Deputy Cowen about the planning regulator and today's announcement is not really relevant to this debate but I will comment on it. We have made it quite clear that we will implement the recommendations of the Mahon report, including the recommendation with regard to a planning regulator. I wrote to Deputy Ciarán Lynch when he was chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht, asking that we have a discussion with the committee about what it sees as the best way to implement that recommendation. It could be by way of An Bord Pleanála being the body, a separate body or the Office of the Ombudsman. There are a number of ways of implementing that recommendation but we certainly intend to implement the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal in full.

In respect of Deputy Broughan's point about housing, I share his belief in the need to provide housing for people. We need to do this in a number of flexible ways.

The Exchequer simply does not have the kind of money it used to have and with which houses were built in the straightforward way.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 16 Oct 2012