Vol. 834 No. 2
6. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he will provide a progress report on the project to convert the National Asset Management Agency houses to social housing including the number of houses transferred to local authorities; the cost to the Exchequer broken down by local authority; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11916/14]
For two and a half years I, and others, have been appealing to the Government to acknowledge the fact that we have a housing emergency in this country and that it needs to take emergency measures to deal with it. One aspect of that is the promised delivery of social housing units from NAMA. Could the Minister tell us how many social housing units we are getting from NAMA? The delivery seems to be pathetic. I want to hear some good news from the Government that we will get serious delivery from NAMA of desperately needed social housing.
We will be starting a debate on social housing after these questions. My Department, the Housing Agency and NAMA continue to work together with housing authorities and approved housing bodies in identifying suitable NAMA housing units and bringing them into social housing use. By the end of December 2013, of the 4,374 units identified by NAMA as being potentially suitable, 2,055 units have been confirmed by local authorities as being suitable for social housing. Completed housing unit transfers from the NAMA loan portfolio stood at 492, with a further 104 units contracted and where completion work was ongoing. This brought the overall total delivery of social housing from NAMA sourced units to 596 units, completed or contracted, since the process began. Some 367 of these units were delivered in 2013 alone.
Progress is ongoing and I expect these numbers to increase significantly in 2014. Further information on the delivery of NAMA sourced units, including a full breakdown by county, is available on the Housing Agency's website. Units acquired from NAMA are brought into social housing use by way of a number of existing delivery mechanisms including the social housing investment programme, the capital acquisition scheme and the social housing leasing initiative. These are existing funding mechanisms and my Department does not distinguish the financing of NAMA-sourced units from other sources of social housing supply. To the end of February 2014, the social housing leasing initiative, including NAMA-sourced units, has delivered 4,736 units for social housing use and expended some €66.4 million in leasing costs since its introduction in 2009. The current average per-unit cost of social housing leasing initiative units, including over 400 NAMA-sourced units, is just under €505 per month.
I thank the Minister of State for her answer but when one wades through those figures-----
The Deputy asked for the figures.
Indeed, and I appreciate the Minister of State's giving them to me, but when one wades through them, we have got 596 units out of a promised 4,300.
We have got 2,000.
Only 496 have been delivered. Others may be in the pipeline or approved as suitable but, given the fact that NAMA has this enormous property portfolio, this is pathetic, particularly against the backdrop of 96,000 families languishing on housing lists for, in many cases, over a decade. Is the Government on top of what NAMA is doing? At the weekend we discovered that much of this portfolio is being sold out to property speculators such as Lone Star. Has NAMA delivered such a pathetic amount of social housing because we have made a decision to sell off all this property, which we need, to property speculators such as Lone Star?
The NAMA properties are by no means all housing. There is a big portfolio of NAMA properties. The Government committed to delivering 2,000 units from NAMA for social housing. NAMA identified over 4,000 properties as potentially suitable but the local authorities deemed only just over 2,000 of those to be suitable.
There is no point taking a house from NAMA that is situated in a place where nobody on a social housing list will live. We have to be realistic. The local authorities are best placed to identify which are suitable. I acknowledge that it was very slow at the start but the Minister and I have had several meetings with NAMA, which has established a special purpose vehicle into which it gathers the suitable properties and makes them available to local authorities or the voluntary housing sector. The figures I gave the Deputy show that it has escalated considerably in the past year and will again this year. I am confident we will deliver the 2,000 units in the lifetime of this Government.
Much seems to centre on what NAMA puts forward as suitable. I take the point about properties in the middle of nowhere being of little use to anybody on the housing lists but is NAMA holding back the good properties because it wants to flog them off to speculators such as Lone Star, Apollo or Kennedy Wilson, which we have recently discovered are in the process of bidding for or buying up these massive property portfolios? They get the good, quality buildings and NAMA offers the rubbish it cannot flog to these speculators to local authorities. It would be a supreme irony if, on the back of a massive crisis caused by property speculators, we handed over this property to another gang of speculators while tens of thousands of families, who could use those homes, languish on housing lists.
We have no evidence that NAMA is not identifying the suitable properties. I have figures for this part of the world. In Deputy Boyd Barrett's constituency 114 properties were available for consideration and 58 of those have been completed or contracted. In Dublin city there were 247 and 115 have been completed or contracted; in South Dublin 42 were available and 40 have been completed or contracted; in Fingal 56 were available and 44 have been completed or contracted. House prices are going up in these areas so there is no evidence to suggest it is offering only properties where prices are low or cannot be sold to somebody else. They are offering a considerable number in the greater Dublin area, which suggests it is not doing as the Deputy suggests. Some of the banks have properties that might be suitable for social housing and we want to pursue those to identify other units.
7. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he has considered the concerns of the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland in respect of the new regulations regarding the inspection of building works at key stages during construction; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11912/14]
This question relates to the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and its concerns about the new building regulations and asks what consideration the Minister has given to these concerns.
I am surprised that Deputy Pringle has taken upon himself to support the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland. Every effort has been made to ensure arrangements have been in place for a successful transition to the new building control arrangements on and from 1 March 2014.
The new online building control management system, BCMS, has been developed to provide a common platform for clear and consistent administration of building control matters across the local authority sector. Briefing and guidance on the new system has been provided for local authority staff and representatives of the key construction sector professional bodies and the Construction Industry Federation, CIF, in recent weeks.
The definitive Code of Practice for Inspecting and Certifying Buildings and Works was circulated to industry stakeholders on 7 February 2014. Standard forms of contracts used for both private and public sector projects fall to be revised to reflect the new regulatory environment. The Government construction contracts committee and the key construction professional bodies both report strong progress in advancing this work within their respective sectors. The Government has established an oversight group to ensure no unavoidable delays will occur in relation to critical public infrastructure projects, at a time when construction activity and employment depends significantly on public sector investment. Briefing and guidance is available within the public and private sectors to deal with contractual challenges and procurement issues that will inevitably arise as change takes place.
The above measures are the key supports necessary to ensure the new regulatory arrangements can work well in practice. Concerns that the new regulations prevent a self-build situation are unfounded, as I have indicated to Deputy Stanley. An owner who intends to self-build will, as before, assume legal responsibility for ensuring that the building or works concerned are compliant and they will be required, as builder, to sign the undertaking by the builder and the certificate of compliance on completion.
As local authorities and industry now move to full implementation of the new regulatory arrangements, my Department will continue to work with all parties to ensure they understand their obligations and the steps necessary to meet them. I do not intend to defer the regulations as the RIAI advocates.
I thank the Minister for his response. It is noticeable in this country that we have always been good at introducing regulations but never at enforcing them and have never intended to enforce them. That is part of the reason they were brought in. One of the concerns of the RIAI is there is no independent oversight to support the people carrying out the inspections. The Minister said that he has done this for major infrastructural projects but what about the people who self-build, who, with the best of intentions, employ somebody to oversee their work? There is no oversight of that person. The problem will be lack of enforcement when the regulations are in operation. Does the Minister intend to have any independent oversight of the people in charge of overseeing the construction?
Under the Building Control Act 1990, the professionals were self-regulated and were supposed to do the job for which they signed up, to satisfy everybody, particularly the customer, that everything had been done according to the specifications laid down and the plans lodged.
That is the problem.
We have changed the regulations because that was not working. We have plenty of examples of no regulation or enforcement. Professional bodies in particular have not stood up to the test of signing off on projects and verifying the job had been done properly on behalf of the customer, rather than just giving an opinion. We will establish a clear chain of responsibility from before the work commences through to completion. We will place a legal obligation on professionals and builders to confirm compliance with the regulations and our comprehensive inspection plan will ensure works are monitored. Nobody could doubt my determination to ensure the era of light touch regulation in the building industry is over.
How will the Minister enforce all that? He is placing legal responsibilities on people to carry out their jobs competently. That is fair enough but how will he inspect that? Will there be an audit or oversight system to ensure compliance? We had all this in place before and the certification was supposed to make everything work and be right.
We did not have this before.
It failed because there was no inspection or oversight. That is the problem.
I know Deputy Pringle has a very keen interest in these matters of oversight and inspection. I am sure he has some knowledge of it from his previous employment. I will get the building control authorities on a risk-based approach to inspect the work. I expect the regulations will dramatically improve the end result for many customers. The people in Priory Hall and similar buildings around the country deserve no better than to have a proper system in place that will be policed and enforced. I am determined to do that.
8. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to revise the planning regulations covering wind turbines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11709/14]
Since the last wind turbine regulations were introduced they are no longer being constructed in isolated parts of the country. The turbines have become far bigger. Since then local authorities have made provisions for them, within county development plans and there are several applications in the planning process. Will the Minister clarify the impact this will have on the landscape where the development sites are closer to communities and on the existing proposals of local authorities and planning applications?
I have undertaken a public consultation, which began on 11 December 2013, on proposed draft revisions to the existing 2006 wind energy development guidelines focussing specifically on the issues of noise, setback and shadow flicker.
The draft revisions propose setting a more stringent absolute noise limit, day and night, of 40 decibels, dB, for future wind energy developments. This limit is an outdoor limit - in general, the reduction of noise levels between the outside of a dwelling and inside would be approximately 10 dB. They also propose a mandatory setback of 500 m between a wind turbine and the nearest dwelling for amenity considerations and that a condition be attached to all future planning permissions for wind farms to ensure that there will be no shadow flicker at any dwelling within ten rotor diameters of a wind turbine. If shadow flicker occurs, the wind energy developer or operator will be required to take necessary measures, such as turbine shut down for the period necessary, to eliminate the shadow flicker.
My Department received submissions on the proposed revisions to the guidelines from over 7,000 individuals and organisations by the 21 February 2014 deadline. These submissions will be taken into account in finalising the revised guidelines. I would expect to issue the final revised guidelines by the end of June 2014 under section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, which will require both planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála to have regard to them in the assessment of planning applications.
I thank the Minister of State for her response. Perhaps she could clarify the impact these regulations will have on applications currently within the planning process, either with the local authority or An Bord Pleanála, or at judicial review stage.
The Minister of State may be able to clarify what seems to be a contradiction in the draft regulations where the minimum distance from a turbine to a residence of 500 m is fixed but in the case of shadow flicker, it is ten blade lengths, which will vary depending on the height and size of the turbine. Why has she opted for a fixed figure in the case of the 500 m distance but a variable figure in the case of shadow flicker?
Finally, would the Minister of State clarify whether she will include the provisions in Senator John Kelly's Bill in the final regulations?
There are wind guidelines currently and these are quite detailed. They will apply until the new guidelines are adopted. That is the answer to the first question.
On the second question with regard to minimum distance, the 500 m minimum distance is not mandatory, and we propose to make it mandatory in the revised guidelines. Effectively, we propose to eliminate shadow flicker in the new guidelines, but that will not come into effect until the new guidelines are established.
On the third question with regard to the Bill, other Deputies and Senators have produced various suggestions as well as proposed legislation. We will consider whatever comes in to us. I have looked at some of the submissions and yesterday met the officials who are dealing with them and sorting them out into the different issues that arise.
There are a large number of submissions. It is an issue of considerable public interest. We will consider them carefully. I myself will consider whatever has come in and ensure that I am fair to all of the representations that are made.
Why has the issue of adequate compensation not been considered? For example, the compensation paid to landowners is approximately €20,000 whereas in the United Kingdom it is up to £50,000. In the United States, there is a good neighbour agreement which deals with individuals whose property is not directly impacted but is within 500 m of the turbine because there are impacts in planning and sterilisation of lands and depreciation of those lands. Why has that not been included in statutory regulations?
I suppose the issue of community gain is one that is being considered across Government as something that should be part of the discussions in all of this, but Deputy Rabbitte's Department would have some of the responsibility in this area as well.
With regard to compensation, that would not come into the area of responsibility under our Department in so far as it is the planning element of it for which we are responsible. However, that is an issue that is under general discussion as well, but not one on which I, with my responsibilities, can make determinations.
It is the gaping hole in it that such is not being considered.
It is a matter for the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, and, I presume, for the agencies under his Department, rather than for ours.
There is 30 seconds left, if Deputy Naughten gives way to Deputy Stanley.
I give way.
The problem is that, while Deputy Naughten referred to regulations, they are actually guidelines. The Minister of State stated that An Bord Pleanála must have regard to them. The problem is that is all they must have.
The other problem that arises with this in Laois, Offaly and the other counties is the issue of the county development plans.
I thank Deputy Stanley.
These plans are being brushed to one side because they only must have regard to them.
I thank the Deputy, please.
I ask the Minister of State to address that in the new guidelines and regulations.
Deputy Stanley made the point.
As I stated, for example, we will be strengthening the distance.
That is acceptable.
When something is a statutory guideline, they must have regard to it.
One only must have regard to it.
9. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the timeframe for the implementation of the radon control strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11913/14]
The question asks the timeframe for the roll-out of the national radon strategy.
The National Radon Control Strategy, which I published on 17 February last, was developed by an inter-agency group and sets out some 48 recommendations, under six thematic areas, with the ultimate aim of reducing the number of radon-related lung cancer cases of which there have been 250 in the past number of years. While it is envisaged that the recommendations set out in the strategy will be addressed over a four-year period, it is also recognised that the full impact of the strategy may not be fully realised within this period, as many of the measures that require to be implemented will continue to reduce the radon risk in subsequent years.
Successful implementation of the National Radon Control Strategy will require action from a range of Departments, public bodies and other stakeholders, and will require clear identification of responsibilities, good co-ordination between the various stakeholders and effective monitoring of progress. Accordingly, I have established a co-ordination group, under my Department's chairmanship and comprising representatives from key Departments and agencies, to implement and track the key recommendations outlined in the strategy. This group will co-ordinate policies and actions on radon across the relevant Departments and agencies; monitor implementation of the strategy; report annually on progress; and at the end of the four-year period covered by the action plan, make recommendations to the Government on what further actions it considers necessary at that time.
I expect the first meeting of the group to take place in April.
I thank the Minister for the response. In the actions outlined in the strategy, I am struck by how it appears to be done to minimise cost in terms of implementing the strategy. Given the high probability of radon-affected areas in the country appears to be fairly well mapped at this stage, I wonder whether the Minister would give consideration to a targeted grant-aid or assistance programme for those who must remediate their properties or, initially, to provide a free test - the radon test costs €56.90 - for those areas. The areas are fairly well mapped and defined, and we know the areas of highest risk. Targeting those areas, either with free testing or assistance towards remediation, would be an effective measure that should be considered.
Residents will not shy away from €56 if they think they will save their lives. We can include it as part of the home renovation scheme, perhaps, in terms of some of the remediation measures required in dwellings. That is some help. I am not making a big deal of it but it certainly needs to be included because it is a serious issue.
There was no work done on this until I became Minister. I made it a priority because the south east, the north west and the west were clear areas of identification and nothing was happening in regard to how we could deal with this radon problem which was killing 250 persons from lung cancer each year.
There are high radon areas in almost every county, but in some parts of the country, mainly in the areas mentioned, I will consider Deputy Pringle's overall principle to see whether we can target additional resources at the areas that are identified and mapped out as the areas of highest incidence of radon.
10. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government when he expects to be in a position to indicate the level of water charges applicable per household or per family throughout the country with particular reference to the need to ensure that such charges are pitched at a level at which the householder can afford; the extent to which he expects favourable comparison to be made with the level of charges applicable in adjoining jurisdictions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11888/14]
51. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if the water charging tariff structure for businesses will be changed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11881/14]
This relates to the concern and anxiety in some quarters for young families, individuals and older persons arising from the predictions made by some commentators to the effect that water charges will be prohibitive and penal. My question is self-explanatory.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 51 together.
With effect from 1 January 2014, Irish Water is responsible for public water services. As the House knows, the Water Services (No. 2) Act 2013 provides that Irish Water can collect charges from its customers in receipt of water services. The Act also provides that responsibility for the independent economic regulation of the water sector is assigned to the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, and that CER has been given statutory responsibility for protecting the interests of customers.
Domestic water charges will commence with effect from 1 October 2014 and Irish Water will issue the first bills to domestic customers from January 2015. The approach to charging will be outlined by Irish Water in a water charges plan to be submitted by it to CER in line with the provisions of the Act. CER will be responsible for approving the water charges plan which will set the approaches to charging domestic and non-domestic customers. CER has indicated that in April 2014 it will be carrying out a number of public consultations, including the approach to the design of domestic water tariffs for both metered and unmetered properties, and the final announcement in regard to water charges will be made in August 2014.
The Government has committed to the provision of a free allowance, above which charging based on usage would apply. The free allowance and the level of funding to be provided by the Government to Irish Water will have a strong bearing on the net charges to be met by households. Consequently, decisions on these matters will provide greater visibility on the expected level of charge. I expect to bring proposals to Government in this regard shortly. Part of the consideration will be the work of an interdepartmental working group established to advise the Government on the appropriate method for addressing affordability issues which may arise with the introduction of local domestic water charges, in particular the concerns of families with children and single people, as indicated by the Deputy in his question.
Local authorities have been instructed to continue with all their current charging tariffs for non-domestic customers on behalf of Irish Water pending the approval by CER of the water charges plan.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I want to raise further the extent to which it is envisaged at this stage that the basic water allowance will be adequate to meet a portion of the requirements in a particular household, be it a family household, a single person or an older person. To what extent will it be possible to take into account the financial circumstances in cases where the charge, being a new charge, is likely to impact significantly on the household?
All of those factors in regard to affordability and the free allowance will be taken into account when the final decisions are made by CER, but equally when the decisions are being made by Government, in particular in regard to people with medical need who have a higher consumption, for example, those using kidney dialysis, as well as children and elderly people who are living alone.
I note the answer to this question is not much different from the answer to my initial priority question. Again, I am disappointed that the Minister's submission has not yet been made to CER. I am also disappointed that I have not yet had access to it but I await its publication in a matter of weeks, as the Minister said, although I would have thought it would be in a matter of days considering how long this has been going on.
The Minister said there is an intergovernmental report that will determine what is contained within his submission. Am I to divine from this that he has sought input from other Ministers who have a responsibility, not only at Cabinet but by virtue of the Departments they represent? For example, to arrive at a free allowance, I presume the Department of Social Protection would have a role, and other Departments, including perhaps the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, in regard to the first fix policy. Obviously, the level of Exchequer subvention would emanate from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform or the Department of Finance.
If that is the case, will the Minister make public the information that has been derived from that intergovernmental group and the relevant Departments contained within it? Will they too make a submission or will it simply be formulated and put into the mix for the Minister's submission? That being the case, will the Minister publish the information he received from those Departments?
The Deputy's assessment is correct. I will publish it in the context of the Government decision in due course.
In due course? At this stage, we would like to be a little more precise than "in due course". I know the Minister is heading out of the country, along with a lot more of them-----
Will the Deputy resume his seat and allow the Minister to reply?
He may be heading out of the country again a few weeks after that. There was an indication that Deputy Durkan and others would have this information before St. Patrick's Day.
We want to reassure the people.
I only go out of the country when I am doing my job, and I am sure it was the same with my predecessors. As I have said to the Deputy, in the next couple of weeks he will get all the information regarding the free allowance, affordability measures and all of the submissions we made, including the interdepartmental working group document to which he referred. That is what I have just said.
12. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to introduce a system of rent control; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11907/14]
38. Deputy Dessie Ellis asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to introduce measures to deal with spiralling residential rents especially in Dublin city; and the way he will ensure these do not discourage the development of more rental properties. [11914/14]
The Minister of State said in an interview recently that Ireland should look at examples in other countries where rents are related to increases in the consumer price index. What actions has she taken within her Department to look at this? As she is well aware, rents in Dublin went up by more than 11% in 2013. I am sure she agrees that, without some controls, this could become a very poor situation.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 38 together.
The Government’s housing policy statement recognises that a balanced housing sector needs a strong and well-regulated private rented sector. In recent years improvements have been made, for example, in regard to security of tenure and the resolution of disputes. The Government recently approved the drafting of amendments to the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, including provisions for the establishment of a deposit protection scheme and for improved management of rental arrears cases.
The private rented sector is an increasingly important element of the housing market, with the proportion of households in the sector almost doubling in the period 2006 to 2011. Approximately one in five households are now renting their home in the private sector. Against this background, the growing evidence of increasing rents, particularly in Dublin, is a cause for concern. The most recently published data from the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, showed a year-on-year increase of 6.4% in the Dublin region to the end of September 2013. PRTB figures for the year ending December 2013 will shortly be published and are expected to show a continuation in this trend.
Nationally, the situation is complex, with data indicating that rents outside the Dublin region and the bigger cities are broadly stable while rents in cities other than Dublin are showing increases in the region of 4%. Meanwhile, ESRI data show that the consumer price index grew by only 0.5% in 2013 and is forecast to grow by 0.8% in 2014.
It is clearly a cause for concern that affordability issues are emerging in the private rented sector, given its importance to the overall housing mix. Accordingly, I have sought to stimulate a debate on how to bring greater stability to the sector, in the interest of tenants, landlords and society as a whole. Fundamentally, the situation in Dublin is a function of housing supply. In 2006, housing completions in Dublin had risen to 19,470, or some 21% of the national total of 93,419. In 2013, of the 8,301 houses built nationally, only 1,360, or just over 16%, were in Dublin. The reasons for this are complex and include the current market viability of developing new housing projects, having regard to the land acquisition, development and construction costs of bringing new houses and apartments to the market, combined with the issue of the availability of credit, both development finance and mortgage credit, and certain other factors.
The Government is taking steps to address these challenges in the property and construction sectors. These will include developing an overall strategic approach to housing supply, identifying and implementing relevant improvements in the planning process, and seeking to improve financing options for development and mortgage provision. Resolution of the housing supply situation is a key element in restoring stability to the market. I am conscious of the need to avoid introducing measures that might have unintended consequences on supply and affordability. Nevertheless, I believe there is scope to explore measures that would alleviate short-term difficulties pending a return to equilibrium in the market. Accordingly, I have asked the PRTB to carry out a focused piece of research that will explore options to address the difficulties being experienced in segments of the private rented sector and to report back to me with policy recommendations in that regard before the end of June.
The problems in Dublin are not unique and are present in many other cities as well. It is interesting that France and Germany are introducing measures to target rents in large cities and high-demand areas such as Berlin, Munich and Paris.
In Germany, landlords in the three largest cities will be unable to charge more than 10% of the average rent for comparable housing in the area. In addition, rents must rise by no more than 15% in three years with no increase permitted in the first year. In France, no new rental contracts in high-demand areas will be allowed to charge more than 20% per square metre above the neighbourhood's median rent.
There is little doubt that if we had more controls here, we would not run into quite as many of the problems we did even in the housing boom. A lack of control is a big problem. If one just lets the markets dictate and work to their idea of supply and demand, the system inevitably runs into roadblocks after a while.
I agree that we need to learn from our neighbouring European countries. They have long-established stable private rental markets that make up a large percentage of their housing. We are not really at that stage yet but the amount of people living in rented accommodation is rising and I want to see that being stable for people. This is why I have opened the debate.
The supply issue is hugely important and we have an under supply at the moment. The Government will be publishing recommendations in the next few weeks regarding the construction industry, which will include the area of supply in the Dublin area. I have asked the PRTB to carry out a short piece of research that will give us the options and let us look at them. We have not reached conclusions yet. I want us to have that debate and to focus on that issue as well as the other elements that are contributing to the difficulties that arise, particularly in the Dublin area and other cities in Ireland.
There is a crisis in the rental market. For the sake of €100 or even €50, many people on rent supplement and RAS are being made homeless. We gave a guarantee that people on RAS would be housed but it is not happening. People are reporting that they are homeless. Rent controls will be of use if there is a proper social housing that involves building social housing on a large scale. This is what is required to keep control and level out the playing field in terms of rents. That is the area upon which we need to focus.
The Minister of State mentioned supply. If she comes up with a plan to build more social housing on a large scale and if the private market is addressed, jobs will flow because there is a huge opportunity out there and it is important that we get there.
I did announce a €58 million mainstream local authority housing programme yesterday. I agree with the Deputy that we need to ramp that up but I do not agree with him that this will solve the problem of rents in the private sector. We will always have a certain number of people who live in private rented accommodation and get support from the State but the problem is that other people who can pay fully for their private rented accommodation are in competition with the people who are subvented by the State and there is just an under supply. I do not think social housing alone will solve that problem. It is part of it but it will not solve the problem as a whole.
We must become much more involved in preventing people becoming homeless when their private rented accommodation is unaffordable for one reason or another. I have set up the oversight group with regard to homelessness and have spoken to Dublin City Council and other local authorities about whether we can establish some kind of preventative system whereby if a family is in danger of becoming homeless, we know that in time to intervene so we do not have to get into the emergency situation. I am working on that.
I agree with part of what Deputy Ellis is saying. The Minister of State talks about €58 million for social housing. She does not need me to tell her that it will need serious multiples of that number to address seriously the shortage of social housing. Even though going back to the State providing social housing does not seem to be on the neoliberal agenda, it is imperative that we do so.
With more controls in the private rental sector, the Government could actually have direct investment in the industry. We will run into a problem. It does seem to be getting worse and the country is becoming more and more centralised. The provinces will die on their feet bar some policy on the part of the Government to direct investment outside of the capital.
The Minister of State keeps referring to the €58 million. This is over a two-year period. However, we must also remember that nearly €60 million was cut from the housing budget for this year. Sometimes, we play with figures and it does not always add up. Since 2008, over €1 billion has been cut from the housing budget. That is one of the big problems we have. We cannot keep cutting and then adding on a bit later on and massaging the figures because that is what it is. The reality is that we need to build more social housing to address this issue. It will not solve all the problems but it will help level the playing field.
While one can readily sympathise with the Minister of State in respect of the situation she inherited, I agree with Deputy Ellis. Ultimately, it is inevitable that the local authority housing stock be increased dramatically at the earliest possible date because some rents in areas like the greater Dublin area have increased by up to 40% in the past 12 months alone.
I must agree with all the Deputies that I want to spend more money on social housing but we could not do it over the past five years. It was cut significantly during the lifetime of the previous Government and we had to cut it because of the deal with the troika which said that our capital budget was cut every year. There was nothing I could do about that. We have turned the corner. I announced €58 million yesterday. The figure given by Deputy Ellis did not take account of the roll-over of money from one year to the next and the stimulus money announced in the budget which was then included in the capital programme. We have money to bring 500 void properties back into use. We are turning things around and will ramp up as soon as we can. I agree with Deputy Wallace that we want to see more investment generally across the sector. This is why the Government has been doing work on the construction sector and will be putting forward policy proposals. Quite a lot of research is being done by a variety of bodies like the ESRI and the PRTB on the area of supply and we will use all that information to improve the situation because we have turned a corner.
