Vol. 865 No. 2
5. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the progress of the pyrite remediation scheme; the targeted number of properties to be remediated in 2015; the cost of the project to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3603/15]
As the Minister will be aware, there are thousands of home owners whose dwellings are falling down around them because pyrite was used in the in-fill material. The pyrite remediation scheme established by the Government, while welcome, is making incredibly slow progress, with no houses remediated to date. How many houses will be remediated in 2015? Is the Minister satisfied that sufficient funding has been provided for remediation works? Does he have any plans to extend the scheme given that thousands of other home owners are precluded from applying to the Pyrite Resolution Board for remediation on the basis of their geographical location? These home owners have no prospect of having their homes remediated this year.
I thank Deputy Clare Daly for raising this important issue. The pyrite remediation scheme is a targeted initiative to assist a restricted group of home owners who have no other practical options to access redress. It is a scheme of last resort to repair homes affected by significant damage.
The pyrite remediation scheme involves a number of stages commencing with a validation process by the Pyrite Resolution Board to check each application for compliance with the scheme's eligibility criteria. This procedure is followed by a damage verification process carried out by the Housing Agency. The next stage involves a decision by the Pyrite Resolution Board on whether a dwelling will be included in or excluded from the scheme. Once a dwelling has been included in the scheme, tendering processes are arranged by the Housing Agency for the appointment of a design professional and works contractor for the preparation and execution of a remedial works plan in respect of the dwelling concerned.
The Deputy sought an update on the progress of the scheme. Since details of the scheme were published in February 2014, the Pyrite Resolution Board has received 627 completed applications. A total of 485 applications have been validated and forwarded to the Housing Agency for the verification stage. Of these, 295 have been approved by the board for inclusion in the scheme and applicants have been notified. A pilot project involving the remediation of five dwellings was completed in the latter half of 2014. The funds provided in respect of the pyrite remediation scheme in 2014 amounted to €2.2 million. Over the course of 2015, the board anticipates that remediation works will commence on projects comprising approximately 280 dwellings.
The problem of pyrite is a serious crisis. The pyrite remediation scheme is a last resort for a large number of home owners. As late as yesterday, I learned of a new estate in my constituency where the presence of pyrite has been verified for the first time. The Minister of State will also be aware that home owners in south Dublin, where pyrite has also been identified, are precluded from applying to the scheme. Houses in counties Donegal and Mayo are falling down because of problems with block works. This crisis has arisen through no fault of the home owners.
The Minister of State indicated that no houses have been remediated.
Five homes have been remediated.
That is as close to zero as-----
The figure is five.
He also stated that 280 homes will be remediated in 2015. Based on the figures provided, the budget for remediation works will be quickly gobbled up. A sum of €10 million was allocated for these works last year and again this year, with €2.2 million expended last year on remediating five homes. Given that the cost of remediation per house is likely to be roughly €50,000, is the Minister of State confident that sufficient funds are available to complete the process? What does he propose to do about the thousands of home owners who have been excluded from the scheme? Will he address the exclusion from the scheme of home owners whose houses have been given a damage condition rating of "1 with progression"?
As the Deputy noted, many legacy issues have arisen in various areas of the country. We are discussing the issue of pyrite, however. The Deputy will agree that the primary responsibility for building defects lies with the builder, developer or company which supplied the relevant building material. They should be the focus of any redress.
As I outlined, the pyrite resolution scheme is an issue of last resort for people who do not have access to any other form of redress. The State has intervened in this area at a cost to the taxpayer and must ensure everything that is done to help those who require assistance is justified. The Government established the Pyrite Resolution Board, which has introduced a validation and verification process, while an independent agency, the Housing Agency, is managing many of the technical aspects of the project.
Five houses were remediated last year as part of a pilot project costing €2.2 million. It is important, however, that we achieve economies of scale in providing a solution to the problem. The Government has committed funding to pyrite remediation works, with a sum of €10 million allocated in 2015. We are also considering whether other areas, including those to which the Deputy referred, can be included in the pyrite resolution scheme. I will make a decision on that matter shortly.
The Minister of State has tried to portray the State as a benevolent white knight that has stepped in despite not having any responsibility in this area. While our building regulations were on a par with those in place in Britain, the difference here was that they were not enforced and hard-pressed home owners were left holding the can.
I welcome the pyrite resolution scheme. I have worked well with the Pyrite Resolution Board and would like it to succeed in its work. I am concerned, however, about the Minister of State's statement that remediation works will commence on 280 properties this year. This will not be possible, as the cost of the works will exceed the budget of €10 million allocated for 2015. Moreover, the proposed works do not even begin to address the exclusion from the scheme of thousands of home owners in south Dublin, Dublin city and counties Donegal and Mayo whose houses are falling down.
As the Minister of State may be aware, two commercial buildings on the north side of Dublin are being demolished because pyrite has been found in the block work. This is an extremely important issue and it is not good enough for the Minister of State to argue that it was someone else's fault and the State is stepping in as a last resort. The State has a responsibility in this regard and the Department must invest more resources and effort in resolving the problem because it will not go away.
I am certainly not trying to absolve the Government or State of any responsibility in this regard. It is a pity the new building regulations and inspection regime introduced by the Government had not been in place many years ago as they may have prevented many of the legacy issues highlighted by Deputy Clare Daly.
I reiterate that the pyrite resolution scheme is an option of last resort. The Deputy referred to many other issues related to defects in building materials and construction. The primary responsibility for those problems rests with the builders who cannot be let off the hook if they are found to have been in any way negligent.
We are dealing with the pyrite issue because these people have been left in isolation, with little or no support, and the Government is intervening to assist them. I reassure the Deputy that the funding is in place to address the remediation of a number of houses, which we have outlined will happen in 2015. There will be continuous engagement between the project managers, under the auspices of the Housing Agency, my Department and the Pyrite Resolution Board to assist these people as much as possible.
6. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if his Department has had any discussion with the Central Statistics Office regarding the EUROSTAT market corporation test; when a decision will issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3441/15]
The Minister has, in previous answers, briefly mentioned this issue. I wish to examine some of the specifics of it. Prior to the announcement of a new charging mechanism for Irish Water's income stream and the costs associated with it, the Tánaiste confirmed that 44% was the figure for Government subvention. Is the Minister aware of, or can he inform the House, what the percentage subvention is now, subsequent to the establishment of the new regime? Has this followed communications with the CSO, which has confirmed those figures to be actual, or is it that such an adjudication can only take place in April, by EUROSTAT, when actual figures rather than estimated figures on revenue are agreed?
A key component of the strategy to establish Irish Water is that Irish Water will be classified as a market corporation under EUROSTAT rules and, as a result, will not, other than in terms of Government operating subvention, be included in the calculation of the general Government balance. The market corporation test is a requirement that income from customers be greater than 50% of production costs. The Central Statistics Office is responsible, as the Deputy is aware, for engagement with EUROSTAT on such matters. My Department has met with that office, which is independent, and is providing the necessary information to facilitate this work. Early engagement with that office by my Department centred around understanding the rules by which a utility such as Irish Water would be considered a market corporation. Based on this understanding, the Government is confident that the underlying funding model for Irish Water supports increased investment in the water sector through an off-balance sheet classification of the utility while, at the same time, providing for water charges which are affordable, clear and certain. The Government remains confident that Irish Water will pass the market corporation test, MCT. However, the decision, based on the information we are providing through the CSO and onto EUROSTAT, is a matter for EUROSTAT. It is my understanding, as outlined earlier, that a decision will be made in or about April.
From what the Minister has said, it appears to me that his discussions with the CSO centred around its informing the Minister of the rules and his obligations under those rules. Based on that information, EUROSTAT will make an adjudication. However, the CSO, as an independent authority, cannot confirm whether the Minister is within the rules or meets the guidelines. Is the Minister aware that a journalist was informed recently by a senior official in the Department of Finance that it is frantically looking at ways and means of dealing with this issue should the Government's proposals fail the EUROSTAT market test, and that the same official is of the opinion that the Government would meet the requirement that the deficit be less than 3% of GDP given the forthcoming increase in taxation revenues? However, this does not get around the situation in which the Government may find itself, as the costs associated with that subvention will be back on the balance sheet and there will be no prospect of Irish Water borrowing off-balance sheet from the markets. This being the case, it will be back on the Government's agenda to fund the forthcoming proposals from Irish Water mentioned by the Minister. Are we then back to a default position, which the Taoiseach mentioned some months ago when he was asked about this issue, with the public being faced with a 4% increase in taxation in order to fund the works that Irish Water believes the programme needs?
I will not engage in speculation on communications between a journalist and Department of Finance officials. I cannot confirm it one way or the other, although I find it very hard to believe. We are engaging with the CSO in terms of providing all the necessary information. We are very confident that it will pass the test. The figure the Deputy quoted is accurate; I think it is 44.38%. We are very confident in the model that has been put in place and, once this has been outlined through the CSO and the information provided to EUROSTAT, that EUROSTAT's determination will be fair and we will pass the MCT. As a result, Irish Water will be in a very strong position. This is what was always intended by the Government. We are very confident that Irish Water, as currently modelled, will pass the MCT.
I understood that 44% was the figure prior to the introduction of the new regime and the associated new costs. Apart from this, it is worrying that the Minister can neither confirm nor deny that a high-ranking Department of Finance official has stated that frantic efforts are being made to devise a mechanism to deal with this issue in the event that we fail the EUROSTAT test. I ask the Minister to speak with his colleague, Deputy Noonan, and confirm or deny that this is the case. If it is the case - I asked this question several months ago - what is plan B in the event that we fail the test? I do not think there is anything wrong with having a plan B in place. Suffice to say that, in the absence of such a plan B, and given what we are hearing, the State will be able to absolve the costs by virtue of increased revenue and still meet the 3% of GDP deficit target, as was envisaged initially. This paints a whole new picture as to the total and utter mismanagement of the process and this debacle since it began two years ago. As I have stated in recent weeks, the Government's credibility, let alone that of Irish Water, would be shot by the idea that so much effort, cost and funding from the taxpayers had gone into creating a model that could not do what it was supposed to do and what it said on the tin. I ask the Minister to confirm to the House as soon as possible that no efforts are being made to subvert the whole process, which he has stood steadfastly behind, as has his Government up to this point.
What I said was that I could not confirm what journalists were saying. I do not think any one of us in this House ever can. However, I am not aware of any such process - I would be so aware, given my Department's role in this - or of any official going down the route referred to by the Deputy. Journalists speculate. However, I can state categorically that my Department and the Government are not examining any other option aside from passing the MCT.
7. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government when the new Leader programme will commence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3437/15]
I congratulate the Minister of State on her transfer to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The Leader programme is probably the biggest single programme within her responsibility. I know what the Leader programme is. I know the money that is going to be provided is wanted. All I wish to know is when it will start.
My Department is currently working with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the European Commission to finalise the text of the rural development programme with a view to commencing the Leader local development strategy selection process in the coming weeks. The Leader local development strategy selection process will be open and transparent and will consist of two separate stages, providing the opportunity for all interested local development and community groups to participate. Stage one, a call for expressions of interest to design and implement Leader local development strategies for the 2014-20 programme period, will commence shortly. This stage will be open to any entity that can show broad local and community participation and that has a coherent vision for the development of their area.
While the Government’s preferred outcome is one local development strategy for each area, there will be no limit on the number of groups allowed to express an interest from within a sub-regional area. The expressions of interest will be evaluated and entities will be selected to develop prospective local development strategies through a process of assessment by an independent evaluation committee, comprising an independent chair, officials from my Department and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, along with external rural and local development expertise. Notwithstanding the level of work to be done in advance of the programme becoming operational, I expect the programme will be in a position to start selecting local development strategies for implementation by mid-2015.
In regard to the Deputy's question on when this process will commence, the expressions of interest stage is imminent. This is a major priority for me. I went to Brussels last week to discuss the matter with the European Commission, including the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr. Phil Hogan. We had a positive meeting and I was able to impress on the Commission the importance of rolling out this programme at the earliest opportunity in order that we can support communities.
I understand the Minister of State will be receiving a letter of comfort to allow her to commence the process. Can she confirm that she cannot invite expressions of interest until she gets that letter of comfort? Having received the letter of comfort and invited expressions of interest, is it correct that the tendering companies will have a period of approximately six weeks to respond, following which there will be an evaluation process and the drafting of detailed plans? Preparation of detailed plans could take six to eight weeks or longer and will then have to be assessed. At the end of that process, contracts will need to be put in place. Given that all sorts of answers were provided in this Chamber predicting that the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, would be up and running long before now, it is unlikely that we will see any Leader companies disbursing money in 2015.
The Deputy is very familiar with the process of establishing Leader companies and the potential for a hiatus at various points in the development of the programme. I have gone through the process on a number of occasions and know that it always comes out very well in the end. My job is to expedite the rural development programme and I assure the Deputy that we had an extremely positive meeting in Brussels last week. It is a priority for me to get it rolled out at the earliest opportunity because I know communities depend on this support. It will take time to go through the process, as the Deputy is aware, but we will get there in the end.
That is the nub of my question. We will get there in the end but these processes always take longer than anticipated and Ministers tend to suggest overly optimistic timescales. In light of what happened with SICAP, as well as my own experience, I believe the timescale suggested by the Minister of State is totally unrealistic. How much money has been put aside for Leader expenditure under the new programme this year? If, as I suspect, it becomes obvious that she will not spend the money under the programme this year, will she arrange for the money to be spent in rural areas under other programmes this year? Otherwise, rural areas will lose out on this money.
The Deputy is entitled to believe what he wants. All I can do is reassure him that we will be rolling out the rural development programme at the earliest opportunity. Expressions of interest are imminent and the details will be announced shortly.
8. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of new social homes that are targeted to be built by the local authorities in 2015 and 2016 arising from the Government's housing strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3650/15]
The information that I have received indicates that the number built will be nowhere near the numbers outlined in the strategy. Will the Minister provide a breakdown by local authority of the number of homes anticipated in the next two years?
Social housing is a key priority for the Government, as is evident in the additional €2.2 billion in funding announced for social housing in budget 2015 and the publication of the Social Housing Strategy 2020 in November 2014. The strategy builds on the provisions contained in budget 2015 and sets out clear, measurable actions and targets to increase the supply of social housing, reform delivery arrangements and meet the housing needs of all households on the housing list. Importantly, the strategy restores the State to a central role in the provision of social housing.
The total targeted provision of more than 110,000 social housing units through the delivery of 35,000 new social housing units and meeting the housing needs of some 75,000 households through the housing assistance payment and rental accommodation scheme will address the needs of the 90,000 households on the housing waiting list in full, with flexibility to meet future demand. In committing to provide these 35,000 new social housing units at a projected cost of €3.8 billion, the strategy marks a fresh start for social housing in Ireland.
Over the six years of the strategy, I anticipate that the 35,000 units will be delivered as follows: 22,300 units to be built or acquired utilising both current and capital moneys, 11,000 units to be leased and 2,300 units to be supplied through refurbishing and bringing back to use vacant local authority stock, which I confess is a bugbear for me. Under the relevant actions of the social housing strategy, national targets for delivery of social housing on a local authority basis are to be agreed for each year. This work is already under way with local authorities in so far as 2015 is concerned and I expect it to be finalised next month. In 2015, I expect that 7,400 new social housing units will be provided, as follows: 1,400 units to be built or acquired by local authorities and approved housing bodies, 3,000 units under the social housing leasing initiative, 1,000 vacant local authority units returned to use and 2,000 new rental accommodation scheme units. In addition, a further 8,400 households will be assisted through the housing assistance payment.
If the Minister could provide a breakdown by local authority, that would be even more helpful.
Let me get this straight: he anticipates 22,300 housing in the housing strategy but indicates that 1,400 houses will be built next year. That is far below the target he outlined previously. We should not fool people out there who are desperate. The 2,000 units to be leased from private landlords are existing rather than new houses. As I do not think these houses will be found, will the Minister explain where he anticipates finding them, given that we know landlords are not interested? Approximately 1,000 vacant units will also come from existing housing stock. The rental accommodation scheme will be continued even though landlords have no interest in this scheme and 8,400 households will transfer to the housing assistance payment scheme.
The Minister made great fanfare but his Government is spending less money on social housing than Fianna Fáil and the Green Party spent in 2010. He claimed that the Government was massively increasing expenditure in this area but it is spending less than that shower spent before the crisis began. He referred to expenditure of €700 million but the previous Government spent more than €800 million. People in the midst of a crisis of homelessness think the Government is increasing expenditure but actually it is doing less than previous Governments.
I am slightly bemused by the Deputy's comment. People across the Houses can criticise the social housing strategy if they so wish, but, by and large, the principles around it have been accepted as regards our going in the right direction. Considering the Deputy's philosophical background, I found her contribution quite strange.
The figures I have are those I have consistently given. They have been the same all the time. They show that there will be a huge push in 2015 towards meeting the needs of the volume of people concerned. The Deputy is not comparing apples with apples or oranges with oranges as regards previous spends. We are getting into the process of rebuilding social houses, council houses, the building of which should not have been stopped in the first place. There was a period of intense need to ramp that up. I am in the process of increasing the volume of local authority staff around the country in order to do that, which is necessary, and we are planning that in advance.
The Deputy will be aware of the figures I gave for 2015 in terms of 7,400 units broken down in the way I outlined. As regards the breakdown of units by local authority, I would be happy to share those with the House post announcement,-----
When?
-----which will be next month, as I stated in my initial reply to the question. I have a meeting today on that matter after this business. We will be in a position next month to outline to the House where this funding will go. I am conscious of the pressure areas across the country, which we have heat-mapped. There are areas all over the country that have housing demand but we must deal primarily with the acute areas.
I have the figures here. It is outlined in the Social Housing Strategy 2020 that the Government will invest €2.2 billion from 2015 to 2017, inclusive. That works out at a capital investment in social housing averaging €733 million a year. In 2010, the Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government invested €980.6 million on social affordable housing. Therefore, this Government is spending less than it did, contrary to what the Tánaiste came in here and said. There is nothing to meet the emergency that exists in this area.
I have two final questions. When jobs are being created or houses are being built, usually politicians are only too keen to promote it. Why has it taken so long for the Minister's Department to give Deputies an outline of exactly where these houses will be built? Could the Minister also clarify for council tenants and for people in private rented accommodation when he will bring forward the legislation relating to water charges?
I took this job primarily to deal with the issue of housing because it is something that is quite close to my heart and is one of the largest issues facing this country both from the public and from the private perspectives. The work that is going on between my Department, a number of agencies and the local authorities is nearing conclusion. It has taken a period of time. The Deputy must remember that I only announced the social housing strategy and the allocation of €3.8 million in December.
I am hopeful that in a few weeks time we will have broken down the allocations across the country. All Deputies across all sides of the House will be made aware of the allocations and, dare I say it, there are some very good projects out there. I have made it my personal business to visit as many local authorities as possible or else have met their representatives here. I have met representatives of the local authorities here on numerous occasions to prioritise the provision of housing. When I took this job, the first thing I did was address local authority managers to tell them that this is my priority, that I would get the funding and for us to ensure that there would not be a big lag time in being able to get sites moving as regards developing houses and working with the approved housing bodies and other organisations. I can assure the Deputy that in the next month or so we will have an outline across local authorities and in particular we will take account of where the demand is most acute.
9. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to initiate any legislative reform to address the continued difficulties that exist in the taking in charge of estates where outstanding issues have not been addressed; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that with construction activity increasing the need for these measures has never been greater; if he proposes to tackle the problems caused by extended permissions making it impossible for estates to be taken in charge; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3610/15]
We are constantly told that the biggest investment individuals will make will be the purchase of a home, yet there is very little consumer protection for purchasers. Construction is beginning to ramp up again, yet many of the defects and deficiencies in the planning system in regard to taking estates in change, bonds and matters such as that, have not been addressed and are not contained in the planning and development (No. 1) Bill and the planning and development (No. 2) Bill, one of which is at the stage of pre-legislative scrutiny before a committee.
My Department is currently reviewing, in the context of the forthcoming planning and development (No. 2) Bill, the provisions in section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, relating to the taking in charge of housing estates with a view to improving and streamlining the taking in charge procedures. A particular focus of the review will be the time limits for the taking in charge of housing estates. My Department will consult with planning authorities in this regard.
Consideration will be given in this context to any amendments to the taking in charge procedures required to streamline the arrangements with regard to water services infrastructure, but I would emphasise that there is no barrier to taking in charge of estates as a result of the establishment of Irish Water. This was clarified again in circular 5/14 to local authorities issued by my Department in November 2014.
With regard to the extension of duration of planning permissions, section 42 of the Planning Act provides that the duration of a planning permission may be extended for up to five years where substantial works relating to the permitted development have been carried out during the period of the original planning permission, or where substantial works have not been carried out because there were considerations of a commercial, economic or technical nature beyond the control of the holder of the planning permission that substantially mitigated against either the commencement of development or the carrying out of substantial works during the period of the original planning permission.
A facility to obtain a second extension of duration of planning permission was rescinded in 2010. I am not aware of any particular problems with the current provisions regarding the extension of duration of planning permissions. However, if the Deputy wishes to write to me with specific examples, I would be happy to have my officials examine them.
I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is open to changing section 180. I had sought that in a provision in legislation that was not opposed and I had hoped to see it included in the planning and development (No. 2) Bill. For a person who lives in a housing estate who wants to petition to have the estate taken in charge, the extension of duration means that it cannot happen before 17 years have expired. That includes the period of seven years after the planning permission has expired plus another five years. There is where the 17 years is arrived at, which is outrageous. I can give the Minister of State some examples of that.
It is one of the areas where there is a legacy issue. It is not only a legacy issue of this crash, but of the previous crash. It was one of the dominant issues I dealt with right through the 1990s when there was more consumer protection for a bag of crisps than there was for a person purchasing a house where a developer had not complied with the planning permission. Now that we are at the point of recommencing development and particularly now that the property tax has been introduced, people ask what they are getting for it if their estate cannot be taken in charge when the developer has not completed the road or the landscaping and other related issues. If there is a management company involved, it adds to the individual costs for householders. It is important that we address the issues from the home owner's perspective. There is plenty of protection for the developer. The local authority is assumed to be the guardian of the home owner, but I can tell the Minister of State that is not how I have found it to be. Some of it has to do with the resourcing of local authorities.
The Deputy is right to point out that there are many legacy issues. We are all witnessing those in our own constituencies. However, ultimately, the developer has responsibility and should not be left off the hook. The local authority has enforcement powers so that a developer is pursued to ensure that full planning compliance and conditions are adhered to.
The Deputy is aware that a planning authority is required to initiate the taking in charge of an estate in two scenarios. The first is where the estate is properly finished and it is at the request of the developer or a majority of the owners of the houses. The second is where the estate is not finished properly in accordance with the planning permission and enforcement proceedings have not been commenced within seven years of the expiration of the permission authorising the development at the request of the majority of the owners.
What that means is that, where a local authority has not been proactive in enforcement and pursuing the developer, the majority of the owners can then petition a local authority to take the estate in charge. I recognise from where the Deputy is coming. The planning (No. 2) Bill, which will come before the Oireachtas and has been published, will provide further opportunity for engagement with Deputy Catherine Murphy and other Deputies, as well as the joint committee.
I wish to reassure Deputies that the new building regulations and inspection regimes and the requirement for certification and standards will, I hope, mean we will not see further legacy issues in any new Bill to which the Deputy refers.
The last time I checked, 19,000 houses in County Kildare had not been taken in charge. Some of the cases in housing estates went back 20 years. There is an issue on which I hope we can all be at one. There are issues relating to bonds and bonds expiring. Bonds have a seven-year duration and are not in perpetuity. When a local authority can take an estate in charge, it will take in charge a liability when developers are still involved. We need to strip out the offenders and reward good behaviour in the kind of legislative provisions that are being put in place.
I welcome the fact that the Minister will be open to some of the proposed changes at a pre-legislative stage in the planning (No. 2) Bill because it is important that we are not still talking about this in 20 years' time. I will not be here in 20 years' time. This does not involve just the recent crash; there are legacy issues that go back to the last crash. We cannot allow that to happen.
I acknowledge many of the concerns the Deputy has outlined. I reiterate that the planning authorities, which are local authorities, have responsibilities with regard to ensuring planning compliance within their respective planning areas. There are legacy issues with regard to unfinished estates, bonds and other matters. Some of them are the result of obvious economic reasons such as developers going bust, which have other implications for home owners. Local authorities have to ensure that they are on top of the planning permissions they grant and that they are proactive in enforcement where problems arise. We need to ensure the problem is not exacerbated.
There is an opportunity in the planning (No. 2) Bill to examine the taking in charge process. Protocols and procedures are already in place and if they are adhered to in the way they are intended we should not see the problems arising to which the Deputy referred. I look forward to further engagement on this issue.
10. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to introduce a waiver for domestic waste collections as promised in the programme for Government. [3607/15]
I refer to the promised waiver for charges for refuse collection, which was a commitment in the programme for Government and was quite clear. It stated: "A public service obligation would include a fee waiver scheme for low income households." That was a Labour Party demand in the programme for Government, or so I am led to believe. It is not too late for the Government to try to do something about this now that there is a Labour Party Minister in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and he has the upper hand. Phil Hogan is in Europe and the Minister, Deputy Kelly, is in the hot seat. I would like to know what plans the Minister has to introduce a waiver scheme.
I thank the Deputy. Flattery will get him everywhere. The Government’s waste policy, A Resource Opportunity - Waste Management Policy in Ireland, was published in July 2012. Among the measures included in the policy document was the establishment of an interdepartmental working group to report to the Government with options to minimise the impact of waste charges on low income families. The working group, which comprises representatives of my Department and the Departments of Social Protection, Public Expenditure and Reform and Finance and the Tánaiste's office, submitted its second report to Government on 23 July 2013.
The Government considered the report. Given the complexity of the issues involved, including the fact that the vast majority of households have moved away from local authority collection - I understand only Kilkenny and Killarney are still involved in it - and have engaged private waste collectors on whom it would be difficult to impose any obligation to provide a waiver system, the Government mandated the working group to continue to examine the issue, with a view to submitting a third report to it shortly. All of those issues are being examined and I expect the report to come before the Government very soon. It is something of which I am quite mindful. It is a complex area, given the fragmentation of waste collection services across the country.
The reply is very disappointing. I received a similar reply from Phil Hogan a couple of years ago. The Minister said he referred the matter for further examination, but waste collection charges are increasing every year. The company I am with has increased its charges every year for the past three years. That is driven, as the Minister knows, by a number of factors, such as landfill and other associated charges.
Illegal dumping is also on the rise, and one can see evidence of that in Dublin city. There is no excuse for it, regardless of the charges. Our party is very concerned about its effects on the environment, tourism, the Tidy Towns competition and towns, villages and cities across the State. As the Minister knows - he lives in a rural area - farmers are gathering up the bags of rubbish people have dumped. We want the situation to change.
I hope the Labour Party has not given up on trying to do something about this issue. Illegal dumping is a separate, but related, issue. I agree with the Minister. Many of those involved in illegal dumping have vehicles worth €30,000, €40,000 or €50,000, which I could not afford to buy. In some cases it is not a question of affordability, which is a key point. Some of those brought to court and fined for illegal dumping have, as litter wardens will say, very expensive vehicles. There is an issue in terms of affordability, on which I hope the Minister has not given up. I hope he can return with a package for low income households.
I concur regarding fly-tipping. It is disgraceful and I agree it is not always done by people from a certain income base. It is a complex issue because of how waste collection services have changed. I have committed to a number of regulatory reforms, of which the Deputy is well aware. July 2015 will be an important month for the household waste collection industry in terms of changes to regulations. It is not an issue on which we have concluded. I expect a report based on the changes I will introduce from a regulatory point of view, and will report that to the Dáil. It is an issue which has not left the agenda.
