Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 7 May 2013

Vol. 802 No. 1

Housing (Amendment) Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Sinn Féin supports this Bill, but with some reservations. Housing is a hugely important issue for people and for the State. As we know only too well, it was housing or an obsession with property and the buying and selling of houses that brought this country to the brink of financial ruin. While we support the Bill, we believe that in terms of housing, the State is failing the people miserably. When we look at the issue of housing in Ireland, we see a dismal picture. Thousands of families are in mortgage arrears and struggling to survive. The Central Bank's figures show that more than one in ten mortgage holders is now in arrears of three months or more and that some 27,000 people, or almost 18% of buy-to-let mortgages are in arrears.

How does the Government respond to this crisis? It responds by introducing legislation that makes it easier for banks to repossess family homes. This type of policy decision and other initiatives of the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government are yet again on the side of the rich, the privileged and big money. Time and again they favour the banks and the big financial institutions over the people. Even more depressing, we have a chronic shortage of social housing, with almost 100,000 people on the housing waiting list. This is an appalling indictment of any state. Fine Gael and the Labour Party have failed people, especially those who depend on social housing. The State has a duty and an obligation to house people. If it is to do this in an efficient and successful manner, it must ensure the public housing stock is maintained at levels that can accommodate those who require housing.

On the question of rent supplement, the picture is also bleak. Some 94,000 people are now dependent on rent supplement to keep a roof over their heads. This is taxpayers' money. In other words, it is money from the public purse that is going to private landlords and property speculators. This is an appalling state of affairs and is a direct result of the policies of this and previous Governments and their abysmal failure to ensure the State's public housing stock is adequate for its housing needs. Another 24,000 people are in receipt of State money from the rental accommodation scheme. This highlights the Government's failure to address in any meaningful way the whole debacle around the housing issue and the resultant crisis. The real casualties of this are families, children, young couples and single people.

Nowhere is the human impact of fall-out from the State's indifference and ineptitude more glaring than in the numbers of homeless young people, who must either sleep on the streets or take their chances in dangerous and frightening hostels and emergency accommodation. The Government pledged to end homelessness by 2016, yet it goes about achieving this target by slashing the housing budget. It introduced draconian laws, capping rent supplement and hounds people into finding cheaper accommodation. The result is that many people, many of whom are vulnerable, disabled, have an addiction problem or are just poor, end up living in sub-standard accommodation.

A recent investigation by Dublin City Council of just under 1,500 flats found that 1,400 did not meet the minimum legal standards for private rented accommodation. The council found that flats had no private bathrooms, people lived in rooms without windows and flats were damp, had mould, poor electrics and inadequate heating. A well thought out proper State housing policy would ensure diversity would be the hallmark of housing in the State. In other words, there would be a balance between public and private housing stock, rather than as we have currently, an excess of privately owned dwellings coupled with an appalling lack of public and social housing.

I mentioned on a previous occasion that foster care allowance should not be included as reckonable means. It is not reckoned when calculating social welfare payments. Also, the fact people on supplementary welfare allowance cannot go on the housing list is wrong. I know of people who have been removed from the housing list when reviewed because of being in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance.

The issue of transfers from one local authority to another is huge. This problem arises in particular where there is a marriage break-up and the person from another part of the country cannot transfer. Other times the problem arises when the person on the list wants to move to get a job or when a person wants to move from one area, such as Cork, back to the home area, such as Galway, to care for an elderly parent. This issue needs to be examined.

It is very important local authorities keep a database of the people who have applied to local authorities and have failed to be approved for housing. On a number of occasions I have been aware of people who have had three or four failed housing applications. Some of these people suffer from mental illness and are on rent allowance, but when the rent allowance is cut off and the local politician makes representations on their behalf, the local authorities say they have no record of applications made by these people. However, the local politician might have a thick file covering three years recording the fact the person has been trying to get on the housing list. Therefore, a database documenting failed applications would be helpful.

I welcome this Bill, which allows elected representatives to take part in setting rent rates in local authorities. This already happens in some local authority areas, but for the most part one relies on the goodwill of local management. Sinn Féin is in favour of stronger local government and we welcome the transfer of decision making powers to properly funded local councils. It is important that this Bill ensures rent levels will not be set by county or city managers alone, but that there will be an input from local representatives. This is a positive development. The Bill will allow councillors to use their local knowledge and enable people to hold decision makers to account.

However, the Bill will not resolve or solve the housing crisis facing people in the State. We have a severe housing shortage, with 97,000 people on the housing waiting list, 94,000 on rent supplement and 24,000 on RAS. This is a problem the Government has failed to tackle. It has allowed the need to grow, rents to rise, conditions to deteriorate and speculative landlords to make huge profits in the absence of public provision. Successive Governments have overseen the depletion of the public housing stock, the over-burdening of the voluntary sector and the drive to subsidise private landlords, developers and speculators who provide what is often below standard housing at a very high price.

A recent parliamentary question submitted by Sinn Féin to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government revealed that in the more than three years of NAMA, only 263 of a promised 3,949 units have been delivered for local authority use. We face one of the biggest housing crises the State has ever seen and if the Government continues to provide social housing at this critically low rate, the crisis will only get worse and will affect more individuals and families. It is a major issue that people across the country are in sub-standard accommodation while units lie empty in estates near them. People cannot understand why these units are not being used to relieve the crisis.

The Minister of State said previously that she would address and speed up this process, but units are not being delivered at the speed people expect.

I heard the Minister of State speaking in this House previously about speeding up and addressing this process. The units are not being delivered at the speed that people expect. Unfortunately, the crisis is getting worse, as waiting lists get longer.

We are facing one of the biggest housing crises the State has ever seen. If the Government continues to proceed at such a low speed, things will get worse for families. The length of time someone has to spend on South Dublin County Council's waiting list has increased from five years to eight. It is not acceptable that a person who goes on the list tomorrow will have to wait eight years before he or she receives an offer of housing. The children who are stuck in this situation have to move from one area or school to another and do not have any consistency in their lives. Dublin City Council recently found that 90% of the apartments it inspected did not meet basic standards.

The Government has created a new timescale for homelessness. It aims to bring long-term homelessness and rough sleeping to an end by 2016. Many of us attended the launch of Focus Ireland's report earlier today. When I spoke to people before the event, they referred to the failure of previous Governments to live up to the 2010 commitment made. I do not think anybody believes the Government has a hope in hell of meeting the new 2016 target. I hope it will happen, but I just do not believe it will. I appreciate the goodwill on the Minister of State's part, but most of the players in the system do not believe long-term homelessness will be ended by 2016. Homeless services have made it clear that they cannot take more cuts, including those made by the HSE. We heard the message from Sr. Stan at today's event that more cuts will mean reduced services.

According to Focus Ireland, there are approximately 5,000 homeless persons in the State. On any given night, up to 90 people could be sleeping rough in doorways, parks, derelict sites and abandoned cars in the Dublin City Council area. The same applies in the other local authority areas. People in the South Dublin County Council area sleep rough around The Priory, in Clondalkin and other areas. They can sleep in parks in warmer weather. They sometimes sleep in basements of apartment blocks. The official figures are not picking up many of the people in question. The number of sleeping bags that the homeless unit in the Tallaght area has to give out every year does not equate to the council's official number of rough sleepers in the county.

People sleeping rough represent the tip of the homelessness problem. Those who live in hostels, refuges, bed and breakfast accommodation, shelters and forms of emergency accommodation comprise the less obvious side of the problem. Sadly, the hidden homeless population is 20 times bigger than the number who sleep rough. There are 531 homeless children in the system. According to figures we were given today, there are 439 children living with a parent in homeless accommodation. All of them are in this hopeless situation because of the lack of action in providing appropriate accommodation to meet their housing needs. A large proportion of them are vulnerable victims. Society's failure to respond to their needs is making many of them more vulnerable. I refer to basic needs such as a roof over one's head, or somewhere safe and warm where one can sleep.

Other Deputies have spoken about rent supplement thresholds. The threshold for a single self-contained unit in my constituency of Dublin South-West is €475. I checked daft.ie today when somebody came into my office to try to find accommodation. According to rent.ie this morning, the monthly rent for a single apartment in the Tallaght area ranges from €780 to €850. When people come in, they are told this is the level and advised to look further out. If they look in Rathcoole or Saggart, they will find that accommodation is not available, unfortunately. Many of them have children who live in another part of the city. The difficulty is that people are being pushed further and further out of the city in order to meet the Department's guidelines. The reality is that the system is not working.

Many people are in despair as they try to find somewhere within the threshold. Many of them do not have the experience of dealing with landlords that would help them to negotiate rent reductions. Housing problems are by far the most frequent issue I deal with in my constituency office. I do not know if other Deputies have the same experience of the crisis. People come into my office because their marriages have broken down and they have to leave the family home, for example, or because someone has been assaulted in the home and they have to get out. They want to know where exactly they can go. They come to us for advice as they seek to solve their problems. Many of my constituents have encountered problems when their relationships have broken up. In such cases, it is usually the male partner who suddenly finds himself with nowhere to live. The age profile of many of those who come in seems to be getting older.

I wish to mention a recent case I dealt with. A male constituent of mine is renting a room in a house for €300. He receives €180 in rent supplement. The RAS section of South Dublin County Council has told him he must leave to find private rented accommodation up to a threshold of €650. The Minister of State might be able to make sense of this. In effect, this means the RAS section will allow a single person to rent somewhere for up to €650, but the community welfare officer will not. Rather than paying rent supplement of €120, the council is forcing this man to look for somewhere in the €650 bracket. He has not been able to find such a property on any of the rental accommodation websites. If he does not find somewhere suitable, South Dublin County Council will pay up to three times what it previously cost the community welfare officer to house him. It does not make sense. Perhaps I will send the details to the Minister of State.

It is one of these quirky cases. The council might want to move people on, but it does not make sense in a case like this, especially given that so many people are on the housing list. The man in question is happy in his current accommodation which is costing the taxpayer less than the arrangement suggested by the council that wants to move him on. It does not make sense.

I have to ask the Deputy to wrap up.

I look forward to hearing further discussion on the Bill which has a great deal of positive merit.

I would like to share time with Deputy Robert Dowds.

The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 which amended and extended the Housing Acts 1966 to 2004 provided local authorities with a framework for a more strategic approach to the delivery and management of housing services. The framework provided for the adoption of housing services plans, homelessness action plans and anti-social behaviour strategies. It allowed for new and more objective methods of assessing need and allocating housing and for a more effective means of managing and controlling tenancies and rents.

One cannot discuss homelessness without referring to the recent case of a homeless man, Josef Pavelka. His plight received national attention when it emerged that he was living in a public toilet. Sadly, he was found dead in a laneway in Ennis at the weekend. His plight and that of his friend, Mr. Baram, received attention last month after Judge Durcan described the fact that they were sleeping in a public toilet as "a scandal". In the aftermath of Mr. Pavelka's appearance at the District Court, the housing agencies sourced emergency accommodation for him at a hostel in Galway. However, he returned to Ennis where he tragically died in a laneway. In the light of what has happened, Clare County Council needs to review its housing strategy and, in particular, provide an outreach service for homeless persons in that county.

The legislative framework also provides a more developed legislative basis for the provision of rented social housing by means of leasing or contract arrangements with private accommodation providers and expanded opportunities for home ownership for low-income households through an incremental purchase scheme and a tenant purchase scheme for apartments. This is long overdue. Local authorities provide housing accommodation through the rental accommodation scheme, RAS. Dublin City Council has used this scheme to a considerable extent, as it provides a housing solution for many families.

It has come to my attention that some of the RAS housing units do not meet the mandatory standards for rented accommodation and the same problem applies to some housing in the private rented sector. Many families who call to my advice centres describe defects in their rented accommodation which include inadequate heating systems, the lack of insulation and dampness. If public funds are being paid to the private rented sector, either through rent supplement or under the RAS, the accommodation being subvented must comply with the standards set for rented housing accommodation. I ask the Minister of State to look into this matter.

I raise the matter of the review of the housing lists carried out by the local authorities during which applicants are asked to return a form stating they are in need of housing and wish to remain on the local authority housing list. In my experience, some families on the housing list fall off it during this review process when they find out Dublin City Council is telling them that they must reapply from scratch for housing, as they did not return the housing revision form. There are genuine reasons people should not be forced to forfeit the points accumulated while on the housing list when this happens. Some applicants will say truthfully that they simply did not receive the form in the post in the first place or that they posted it to Dublin City Council which did not receive it. I have dealt with cases in which housing applicants in receipt of rent supplement continuously over the length of time in question from Dublin City Council were removed rom the list. Housing applicants who are tenants in private rented accommodation and in receipt of rent supplement regularly move from one rented dwelling to another for a variety of reasons. I ask the Minister of State to look at this problem which is not unique to Dublin City Council, whereby people are removed from housing lists and forfeit the points they have accumulated.

The differential rents charged to social housing tenants by Fingal County Council in my constituency compare well with those charged by other urban county councils, according to that local authority. My colleague on Fingal County Council, Labour Councillor Peter Coyle, asked the council how its differential rents scheme compared to that in place in other councils. He was told that the Fingal County Council differential rents scheme was similar to others throughout the country in that the rent was based on a proportion of net assessable income of the principal earner, together with a contribution from each subsidiary earner in the household. Rents under the Fingal County Council differential rents scheme are calculated on a figure of 12% of net household income, with a cap of €40 per week for each subsidiary earner. Of the schemes reviewed throughout the State, 12% is the second lowest rate charged. South Dublin County Council has the lowest rate at 10%, while Dublin City Council has a much higher rate of 15%. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council charges even more at 16%. Galway County Council operates two rates of 15% and 20% of household income, while Cork County Council charges a rate of 15%.

The different schemes reviewed also show variances with regard to commencement dates, with a commencement date of March in other Dublin local authorities. Others had a commencement date ranging from January to June. One of the changes in the scheme being implemented by Fingal County Council involves the movement of the commencement date from January to the last Saturday in April. This was done to facilitate the annual rent assessment, with the objective of advising tenants of the rent charges before the April starting date and, therefore, assisting them in the management of their rent accounts.

The rent scheme details the manner in which the local authority will determine rent and other charges. Local authority rents are set in accordance with the rent scheme adopted by each housing authority, having regard to the principles laid down by the Department in section 58 of the Housing Act1996, as amended. The percentage of income varies within and between rent schemes, depending on the terms of the scheme and the particular circumstances of the household concerned. The new legislation for local authorities differs from the existing legislation in a number of respects. The making of a rent scheme is now a reserved function of the housing authority, giving the elected council a role in determining the authority's rental policy. The Minister has clear power to make regulations prescribing the specific matters each housing authority must include in its rent scheme.

I commend the Minister of State with responsibility for housing and planning, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, for the work she has put into this area. I look forward to working further with her on the housing reform agenda.

I fully support the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, in her work to achieve harmonisation of local authority rents across geographical areas. I also support her determination to continue the system, whereby rent is determined as a proportion of a tenant's income. It is good that local democracy will, in this small way, be strengthened if county councils have the power to set rent levels. One aspect we need to watch is the need for local authorities to ensure tenants avoid running up large rent arrears. I am aware the Minister of State and the Minister for Social Protection are very much aware of the need to tackle this issue.

To address the housing issue more generally, the Government has been left with a hugely difficult housing problem. There are many critical problems in housing provision. Last week I listened to Deputy Michael Healy-Rae as he got into a big lather about how badly the Government was dealing with the issue. One would swear he and his family had nothing to do with the Fianna Fáil approach during the 14-year period from 1997 to 2011 when it held power. Many of the problems being confronted in the provision of social housing stem from the fact that those Fianna Fáil Governments essentially left it to the private rented sector to provide for most of those on the housing list. This directly led to a situation where 100,000 families are on the housing list. In my own area, south Dublin, 10,500 families are on the housing list. We must face up to the growing problem in housing provision, especially in the capital and other major urban centres. To highlight this problem, the website www.daft.ie shows that as of today only 2,300 properties are available for rent in Dublin.

An increasing trend in recent years is of private landlords not being willing to accept rent allowance tenants. Ten days ago I spoke to one auctioneer who said none of his client landlords wanted to take people from the social housing list who would be receiving rent allowance, in part because of the bureaucratic hoops they would have to jump through with the local authorities and also because it was much simpler to deal with people who were working when renting property. I was very struck by that conversation. He was saying the landlords dealing with him did not want to have to deal with the county council.

Another related issue which must be addressed is that of the rental accommodation scheme, RAS. One needs to be unemployed to be placed on the RAS in the first place. There is, therefore, a case to be made for the scheme to be broadened. There is also a problem in that estate agents such as the one to whom I referred tend to run from a mile from the RAS as landlords want to be able to vet their tenants to ensure they have good and reliable tenants. This obviously conflicts with the traditional system of being placed on the list for a time period, which councils have understandably used. Some tweaking of these arrangements is needed. More generally, delays in processing housing requests mean tenants are losing out on houses.

Last week, Deputy Pascal Donohoe referred to the substandard nature of some private rented housing. Part of the reason for this may be that landlords are in negative equity, but it is a scandal that needs to be addressed.

There are several anomalies within the rent allowance system which I hope will be addressed. For example, the level of payment is not sufficient in Dublin which, as others have mentioned, is leading to under the counter payments, which put great pressure on tenants. There are also anomalies in the allowance being granted. For example, in the Clondalkin area in my constituency, one or two adults and a child are entitled to €875 per month, but when the child turns 18 years, this amount drops to €600 per month, even if he or she continues to reside with the parents. Another issue is that the rent for even modest three-bedroom accommodation is significantly more than the €875 per month, while bedsits cannot be found for the sum of €475 on offer for them.

In Clondalkin, the asking price for a one-bedroom unit is between €600 to €650. Therefore, rent supplement is not covering the cost and is creating problems as a result.

I know the Minister of State has sympathy for this idea because it is traditional Labour Party policy to have a house building programme. Alternatively, vacant buildings could be taken over, preferably by county councils, because it would mean they would build a body of housing that they could rent to tenants on the housing list. There is also a need for a significant retrofit or upgrade of accommodation. I hope that if moneys become available from whatever source, be it from the European Union or money we can provide ourselves, some of it will be directed in these directions. One of the advantages of county councils having more housing units available than housing organisations is that it would provide for more local control over housing provision.

I ask the Minister of State to clarify what the position on the possibility of EU investment and getting money through the European Investment Bank which could be directed down this route. Overall, we need to get away from the situation allowed by Fianna Fáil Governments where private landlords looked after people on the housing list. We need a national housing strategy to work out an inventory of how many social houses are needed. I support the Bill.

Deputies Catherine Murphy and Clare Daly are sharing time.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill, of which I am generally supportive. I have two queries and would welcome it if the Minister of State addressed them. They relate to changes being made to section 6(b) and (e) of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009. I cannot find an explanation of the intended consequences and would welcome it if the Minister of State addressed them.

Rents are one aspect of the problem. Very few of us are staying with the Bill, but the area of housing dominates much of our work as public representatives because there is such a crisis which manifests itself in a range of ways. A review of the housing waiting list is taking place, but there are 97,000 individuals or families on the waiting list, a considerable number of whom are in receipt of rent assistance. There are poverty traps in the system. If people find a job, it is often difficult to see how the provisions sit with the job activation measures run by another Department.

The housing waiting list problem is not the same throughout the country. I had put figures together in parliamentary questions. A total of 43% of all housing applicants are located in six areas: Dublin city, south Dublin, Cork city, Cork county, Kildare and Fingal. The six areas with the lowest percentage are Leitrim, Roscommon, Longford, Laois, Cavan and Sligo which account for a figure of 3%. Therefore, the picture is not the same nationally and there may be different responses in some parts of the country. There are about 7,000 individuals or families on the waiting list in my county and there is a real difficulty with the rent cap limits. The position in south Dublin has been mentioned. The rent caps in Kildare are €200 lower on a pro-rata basis. When one looks at major companies such as Hewlett-Packard and Intel and the National University of Ireland, Maynooth where a considerable amount of student accommodation is required, these rent caps almost seem like an attempt to cleanse the area of people receiving rent assistance. I have seen families who have lived in the area all of their lives and have an attachment to it having to take their children out of school and move further away. Taking their names off the list and moving to the counties mentioned where the waiting lists are smaller is not an option because they would have to start from scratch. There is a real problem with moving people away from their families and where they have connections and supports.

Differential rents are designed to ensure there will be a fair ratio between rent and income. I can find very few people in my area who are not topping up. People just call it topping up and do it under the counter. If they tell the Department of Social Protection that they are topping up, they will be told to move. They are ending up in the MABS and not paying their ESB bill and possibly not putting food on the table. It has become a major problem, one I have raised with the Minister for Social Protection for the past year. It must be addressed.

In respect of the RAS, it takes more than six months for housing to become available in the system. I find it incredible that one receives a lot more in Kildare if one enters the RAS than one would in receipt of rent assistance. I spoke to a man recently who had leased his apartment for 15 years under the RAS. In the 15 years he will be paid the equivalent of what the apartment is worth by the State and will still own the apartment at the end of it. It is crazy; one cannot rationalise it. I understand why it is happening - bailing out the banks and paying the bondholders have reduced our ability to tackle debt levels and that there is a Government debt level ratio that must be maintained, but there are false economics and I would be surprised if the Minister of State disagreed with me. Landlords do not want to engage with the RAS because it takes too long. The only way I see houses under the RAS coming into the system is if landlords match a tenant to whom they would like to rent their house. I also note that nearly all of the time of staff in the council is taken up in maintaining existing RAS houses and that getting additional houses into the system is time-consuming. The fact that staff numbers in local authorities are being cut also presents a difficulty. Local authorities are hesitant in taking on obligations when there may be a change in the system. There is an urgent need for certainty.

The shared ownership scheme will become a problem because people will not be able to buy out the other portion of their shared ownership loan. Some of these are 50-year loans and very often people took them out in their late 30s. They will have reached retirement age before the second part of the equity is supposed to be bought out, but nobody will give a mortgage to somone where the house is worth less than when it was bought. That is a problem with differential rents coming down the tracks. There will be a serious problem not too far into the future.

A tiny number of mortgage-to-rent properties are coming into the system, but a bigger take-up would place a demand on the Revenue budget. The number of repossessions will increase. Therefore, a policy to deal with repossessions must be devised.

Like Deputy Robert Dowds, I asked auctioneers in my area why they were not taking RAS houses. In the main, they complained about the bureaucracy involved. They do not wish to deal with rent assistance tenants because it may take months before the application is granted. It is common in the outer reaches of my constituency, rather than in urban areas. I took photographs of the notices in the windows of auctioneers' premises which show that they are screaming for houses to rent. In a strong rental market the people who will do least well are those in receipt of rent assistance and subject to a cap on their assistance payments.

I may have strayed miles from the subject of the Bill, but we need to get to grips urgently with this problem. There are different solutions for different parts of the country. Everyone on a housing list will require some form of accommodation, but there is a real crisis in urban centres and people are paying a very heavy price for the uncertainty when trying to put a roof over their head.

I wish to make some brief points from a couple of standpoints. It is necessary to consider the interest of the tenant and of the local authority and also the overall situation in the real-world rental market.

Other Deputies are correct in highlighting the current situation. I refer to the recent report in the media about the rise in private rents which has vindicated what all of us knew and have been saying for a long time. The banks are not lending money for new mortgages so it is inevitable that rents in the private rental sector are rising. The figures are quite stark. The average rent for any property in the State is €815 per month. The gap between the urban and rural areas which has been highlighted by other Deputies, has been growing steadily over the past number of years. There is now a serious disconnection in our system and for which ordinary tenants are paying the price. I will not list the rents and maximum permitted rents in the various local authority areas. Suffice to say that it is only in the four Dublin local authority areas that an amount over the average house price is allowed for which is for the biggest three-bedroom house type. The figures allowed in other parts of the country are falling well short. I will not repeat the points, only to say that this is the cause of significant financial and emotional stress for many families. There are many cases where people have fought to get private rented accommodation in their area but they have been unable to meet the demands from the Department of Social Protection to have that rent lowered. They are then forced to move out of the area which results in a disconnection of other aspects of family life. For example, a lone parent of a child with special needs may have to remove the child from the local school because staying in the area is not a reality. There is a disconnect between different Departments and this is having a significant impact on people who are renting.

What is happening in the private rented sector feeds into the Minister's overall housing policy. Clearly this Bill is a step in that process of handing over the management of rent supplement to the local authority. We have to take this into account. There are positive aspects to that move. It is a good thing that local authorities would be charged with the management of all housing accommodation. However, there are also significant dangers if sufficient resources are not provided. It also reflects a moving away from the idea of direct provision towards housing support which, in my view, is not adequate. We have already highlighted that the supports have been inadequate. People are moving from secure, relatively permanent, decent accommodation into much more flexible, transient and less regulated accommodation with far less security of tenure. That is a difficulty which needs to be examined. Against that backdrop, those who have a council house and who are the beneficiaries of this Bill are the lucky ones. The differential rents system, whereby one's rent is linked to ability to pay, is a good system which should be protected. However, in recent times the increases in local authority rents is a concern. I have no doubt that the Department will deny it but the word on the street in the local authorities is the reason for the rent hike is to cover the demands being put on local authorities for the new home tax which they need to recoup elsewhere. They are already grappling with tenants who have large enough volumes of arrears. We need to be cognisant that an increase in rent will not help that situation. We need to factor in the issue of the impact on the maintenance of housing stock of other cutbacks at national level. This scheme proposes a streamlining of local authority rents around the country. This is welcome, as is the plan to fix those rents at 12% to 15% of income. Allowing councillors a flexibility in deciding those amounts is a very good proposal. We have long argued that the removal of powers from councillors has been a retrograde step. It is essential that more power be devolved to local authorities. I would prefer to see it go further. We have to dig deeper.

If councils are to have the power to set rents at these levels and to impose increases then this must be considered in the context of the overall management of housing stock and the anomalies that have arisen. I refer to Fingal County Council, the one I know best. It currently charges tenants €3 a week for boiler maintenance, amounting to €150 a year on top of rent. I do not pay that much; it is an astronomical price for boiler maintenance. The council says it has no option. Local authorities cannot absorb the price of repairs because their central budgets have been cut. Many local authority houses have windows and doors in poor condition. It annoys the tenants of such houses to see vacant houses being refurbished with new windows, doors and insulation to create energy-efficient houses for new tenants. The loyal tenant who may have been a tenant of the local authority for years will ask, "What about me?"

We need joined-up policies. Last Friday, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, launched something - I am not sure what he was launching because he seems to launch something every day of the week. He issued a few press releases to argue correctly that energy-efficient homes are the long-term solution to fuel poverty. What about our housing stock? The windows are draughty and people are spending more just to keep themselves warm because local authorities are not being adequately funded to bring those houses up to standard.

These things feed into the overall change proposed to local authority powers to set and streamline rents. There are very big differences. For example, in relation to local authority dwellings that have been taken over but are being run by management companies, the tenant not only pays rent to the local authority but also pays a €10 or €15 management fee. For someone on a social welfare income, it is a highly onerous demand. In discussing changes in this area, we must examine the larger picture. There is no point in providing local authorities with the power to increase rents if it means it will drive someone over the edge. The only result, apart from the stress on the person, will be an increase in arrears. I would like to see how this fits in with the whole area of incentives or initiatives to bring housing stock up to an adequate standard to meet the new regulations. What will happen where a tenant is in a position to improve the state of a house and would like to invest in it? Can we link the rent system with an ability to improve the housing stock for the benefit of everybody?

There is nothing hugely wrong with the Bill. I have some questions about the move to an over-reliance on support as opposed to direct provision, which has stood the test of time and been a desirable mechanism for providing people with a stake in their communities. There are a great many unwilling landlords who bought homes they cannot afford to live in and are now renting out. They would get rid of them if they could but, because of negative equity, they are afraid of the debt they will have if they walk away. Presumably, the State could do some deal with the banks to take over those units while writing off the debts of the owners to allow us to improve the housing stock and create security of tenure. There is an overemphasis and reliance on the private market.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. While the sole purpose of the Bill is to make technical changes to the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, it is none the less very important. It is a short, technical Bill that is required to ease the path of legislation which has already been enacted. I will try not to raise issues already raised by other Deputies. There is a desire on all sides of the House to solve the issues we face. I do not envy the Minister of State her post. She has inherited legacy issues from the overhang of the Celtic tiger era which will be difficult to sort out. A certain amount of realism must be brought to bear in the debate. Those of us who came to the House after cutting our teeth in local authorities know how important housing issues are. As a Labour Party Deputy, I would like to see the Government maintain direct provision, which, as other Deputies have said, has stood the test of time. Something went hugely wrong during the Celtic tiger era, particularly, if memory serves me, in 2004 with the watering down of the provisions of Part V of the Planning and Development Act. Martin Cullen was the Minister with responsibility at the time. That was when we started on the slippery slope to where we have ended up today, with a significant housing crisis.

I welcome the fact that the Bill will transfer powers from local authority management to elected representatives, which will serve us very well. Many people nationally find themselves in serious economic difficulty and the Bill will phase in changes over a period of three years. There will be a bedding-in period to ensure that those affected do not suffer undue hardship while the transition is being made and the rental scheme is being harmonised. There is no doubt that we face a crisis in this sector. Housing lists far exceed the amount of housing available to meet demand. Nevertheless, I have noticed that there are a huge number of unoccupied houses in places where people do not want to live. Housing lists are extremely lengthy and we do not appear to be able to match up the people with the houses or the areas. There is a great deal going on and I do not envy the Minister of State her task of solving the problems we face. Due to the crisis, we must be creative. It makes me angry to think of the mess we have been left in as a direct consequence of greed and in some cases, though I am loath to say it, pure stupidity. One cannot build houses in the middle of nowhere and expect people to flock to them when there is no local chemist, school, doctor or shop. The mind boggles at the idea that communities would develop in these areas.

The last Administration sat idly back as developers dictated where houses were to be built. I do not want to see us relying on the private sector. I want to see us revert to direct provision at some stage. However, if we are to change to a warts-and-all model of private sector provision, which is not something I want to see, we must build houses based on housing needs assessments. Not doing so was one of the reasons we got ourselves into such a mess. We need good, clear data which dictates where needs are and we must build only where a need has been identified. The data must be accurate and in black and white. In my constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny, I see on an almost daily basis the problems associated with a lack of appropriate housing, particularly in rural areas, including Borris, Leighlinbridge, Paulstown, Gowran and my own town of Graiguenamanagh. There are no houses available for rent in those places because the houses do not exist.

Security of tenure is of great importance. If people are going to go to the private sector, we must provide for security of tenure as they do on the Continent, where 99-year leases which can be passed on to one's children are available. Leases of five, ten or 15 years will not make for good communities.

The Bill amends section 31 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, which makes provisions with regard to the rents systems and charges of housing authorities, so that they can be brought into operation in an effective sequence. The Bill proposes the deletion of wording in section 31 which conflicts with a rent system in which charges are determined on the basis of household composition, income and, where applicable, the cost of the facilities provided. The Bill will provide for the effective implementation of a new, harmonised local authority rent system from 1 January 2014 and pave the way for a new housing payment scheme whereby responsibility for the rent supplement scheme will be transferred from the Department of Social Protection to local authorities.

Responsibility for setting local authority rents has been devolved to city and county managers since 1986, with the result that there is wide variation across the country in rent levels and the method of their calculation for broadly similar assets funded wholly by the Exchequer. Every effort will be made in prescribing base and differential rent calculations to limit the increase or reduction in rental incomes that many local authorities will inevitably experience when rents are harmonised.

In particular, the regulations will allow for a transition period for households whose rent increases significantly under the new scheme and other households of differing compositions and income will be charged at a lower rent. The making of a rent scheme is now a reserve function of housing authorities, giving the elected council a role in determining the authority's rent policy. Further legislation, relating to the new housing assistance payment scheme and other issues, will be published later this year.

Not a day passes without me being contacted by families from my constituency of Louth and east Meath looking for houses from local authorities. The main trouble involves upgrading. A family may have been granted a house four or five years ago when it had only one child, but there may now be two or three children. The family needs more space and a bigger house. There is a shortage of two-bedroom houses in the constituency of Louth and the best way to combat it is to upgrade. Young families with one child must wait a very long time because of the shortage of two-bedroom houses. They are not entitled to three-bedroom houses so they must wait for two-bedroom houses to become available.

Having spent a number of years on a local authority, I welcome this Bill. Any power being divested to council members is always welcome. For some strange reason, local authority members never seem to use the powers they have or reflect on the powers they use. We seem to be fearful of using the powers we have. Local authority members may be scared they will not have the pothole down the road filled if they start to give out to the county manager and use the powers as they are entitled to. I welcome the fact that this Bill is giving more power to local authority members. Previous Administrations used to centralise power compared to what we are doing in this Bill.

There is a problem in certain areas of north Kildare with regard to rents. Kildare is taken as a whole county and calculations for rent supplement are based on what is perceived as the rental value in the whole county. However, in certain parts, particularly in the northern end which is mostly in my constituency, rents have been forced upwards in areas like Celbridge, Leixlip, Maynooth and Naas, particularly since the announcement of the Kerry Group coming to the area. As a result, rent supplement does not match the requirement on the ground. The idea of divesting that power from the Department of Social Protection to the local authority should be taken on board. The local authority should have some say on rent supplement. People are starting to move to Athy because rents are so much lower and rent supplement, which is applicable to the entire county, can be used for it. People cannot get the same kind of property in the northern end of the county. Divesting this power to local authorities would give them some say in the matter.

A problem mentioned by other Members is boarded up stock in local authority areas. It is a shame considering the number of people on the housing list. If we send a letter to each of the county managers or through the County and City Managers Association, perhaps it will put pressure on them to do something about it. We see boarded up stock in local authority estates and rural areas.

Another problem concerns Part V of the Planning and Development Act. I voted against it on my local authority and I have been a vociferous critic of it. I could see what some local authorities were trying to do with the 20% social and affordable housing provision. Some local authorities used to negotiate with landowners on the zoning of land on the basis that if they were given 20% of the land it could be used for a school site, playgrounds, recreation fields and a building for small businesses. Instead, the Part V social and affordable housing provision meant only houses could be built on this land and made available to the local authority. This provision was supposed to solve the problems by getting people off the housing list but the list has expanded rapidly since then. It is a failed policy of a previous Administration. Perhaps the Minister of State will examine it and get the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, to think about introducing an amendment to the planning Acts to remove the provision. Local authorities should be allowed to build houses on land. As a work in practice, it has failed utterly. People are trying to pay back the loans they received from the local authority when they received a house under the Part V provision. Some people have not been housed because of the lack of housing stock. Since the crash in 2008, virtually no houses have been built so no additional housing stock has been built as a result of Part V. Perhaps the Minister of State can take these points on board. I welcome the Bill and anything that gives power back to local authorities is always welcome. Councillors should have more of a say in what they need locally.

I welcome this technical Bill. The main objective of the Bill is to enable local authorities to draw up rental schemes as a reserve function. I concur with Deputy Lawlor that any occasion of central Government giving more power to local authority members is welcome. I am a former member of Clare County Council and its strategic policy committee on housing. I see the merit in the proposal.

Local authorities are key providers of housing and various housing supports and schemes. Housing is of fundamental importance to each individual in the State. The Bill will bring about greater transparency to the system by which rents are calculated. As it stands, there is a wide variation in the rents charged by local authorities. This Bill will bring about standardisation in the system and allow a certain level of discretion required for local authorities in setting rent parameters in the area. Legislation will be published later this year to facilitate the transfer of responsibility for the administration of rent supplement to local authorities. This change is welcome as local authorities are key agents in assessing housing applicants and knowing their needs. It makes sense to transfer the function to local authorities.

On a daily basis, my office is in touch with Clare County Council and the county's various town councils in respect of housing matters. I express my thanks to the hard-working staff of various housing sections. I have always found them helpful. A question that has risen over the past number of years concerns the processing of housing improvement grants by Clare County Council, namely, the housing adaption grant for people with a disability, the mobility aids housing grant scheme and the housing adaption grant for new houses. Unfortunately, access to these vital grants has been restricted to individuals experiencing exceptional health issues. The Department provides two thirds of the funding for each of the grants and the local authority, Clare County Council, provides one third. There is a problem in trying to get access to these vital grants that help people with their quality of life. There is a major backlog in County Clare.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share