Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Oct 2022

Vol. 1027 No. 4

Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

Deputy Matt Carthy

Every political issue is put into perspective by our previous conversation and contributions. Focus Ireland has published its annual report on homelessness and it makes for alarming reading. The report states that rising homelessness in Ireland is not inevitable but rather it is the result of the wrong political decisions and that the crisis will only get worse this winter unless the Government acts now with urgency. The words of Focus Ireland founder, Sr. Stanislaus Kennedy, capture the heartbreaking reality of this crisis. She said:

Over 3,200 children who are homeless do not have the luxury of time. Their childhoods are being stolen as homelessness is causing young people to lose out on the safety... of a permanent home. This situation is unacceptable and must end. Much greater political leadership and commitment is urgently required... if we are to overcome the challenges our society faces in ending homelessness.

For two months in a row we have had record levels of homelessness reported. Within a month or two, unless something drastic changes we will hit and exceed the shameful milestone of an official homelessness figure of 11,000 people.

The human stories behind this figure are ones of real hardship. These include: families living in tents; children growing up in hotels and bed and breakfast accommodation and not knowing the security of a place they can call home; and households transported and displaced out of their communities because there are no emergency accommodation places left in their counties. Approximately 60 families from Dublin are in emergency accommodation in Meath and Kildare and there are a further 60 individuals from Dublin in emergency accommodation in Kildare. The Government needs to act now and with real intent. Given the scale of the challenge that exists the budget was deeply disappointing. There is no increase in social housing targets and the insufficient targets that are in place will not be met this year. There was no funding for any new initiative to prevent the dramatic rise in homelessness. Even though the majority of those forced into homelessness are coming from the private rental sector there was no ban on evictions. The truth is that without a significant change of direction in these areas we will see more families pushed into homelessness and into the nightmare of a winter without a secure roof over their heads.

In the last week, the media have reported that the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has only started to liaise with the Attorney General about the feasibility of introducing a winter ban on evictions. We saw during the pandemic that the State responded with emergency protections that safeguarded tenants. We already know it is feasible because such an eviction ban was put in place as part of Covid measures. We see that the Scottish Government has already introduced an emergency winter ban on evictions from early September. A similar eviction ban is required here and it has to be accompanied by an increase in the tenant in situ scheme. Instead we hear that deliberations are at an early stage and that the Government has not yet agreed to introduce an eviction ban.

Homelessness is spiralling out of control. It is an emergency and the Government must deliver an emergency response. I urge the Taoiseach to act urgently, change direction and immediately introduce a winter ban on evictions. With better political choices the tide of homelessness and the crisis we are facing can be turned but the Government must start today.

The Taoiseach

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue because it is one that goes to the heart of the kind of society we are and want to be. The Government is very concerned with the increase in homelessness and it has a comprehensive suite of responses. We need to understand and assess the nature of homelessness in modern Ireland. It is different from what we might have traditionally perceived it to be and it is a changing dynamic all of the time in terms of the presentations on a monthly basis to the emergency accommodation sector, which adds pressure on an ongoing basis.

On the rental protection side, very significant protections have been brought in already to delay any evictions or moving anyone out of homes. We have legislated to increase the notice-to-quit period for tenancies of three years' duration or less, from 28 days to three months. Where there is the risk of a tenant being evicted into homelessness as a result of a landlord selling a home, local authorities have been told by the Minister they can buy those houses to prevent anyone becoming homeless. The resources are there to do that. In addition, the discretionary rate of the housing assistance payment, HAP, has been increased substantially, which will enable tenants to meet any increases in rents. We also have the rent pressure zone caps and so on.

More fundamentally, in terms of the issue the Deputy raised regarding a winter eviction ban, it is not only today or yesterday that these issues are being considered by the Government. We considered that action during the Covid period because of the issues that existed at the time that justified such a winter eviction ban. The Government acted on that. It is just one potential option but it is not the solution. In fact, some of the homeless organisations would accept it is not the solution and, hence, they talk about a temporary winter eviction ban. There are other policy issues that have to be assessed in that context to ensure we have a significant supply into the rental market, which is a concern and a problem in terms of getting more houses back into the market to rent out to people. There has been a steady decline since 2017 in the number of houses that are available for rent. We have to draw conclusions from that in terms of why people are exiting the rental market as small landlords and not maintaining the position of keeping their houses available for rent.

On the social housing front, we will have a record number of social houses built this year. We have to increase that. The target is about 10,000 builds between approved social housing bodies and local authorities on an annual basis. We will get over 8,000 this year, which is an increase, and we want to be consistently above that figure for the next ten years. Every year, we will be doing in and around 10,000 social houses. The Minister acted very quickly in the past two years to bring voids back into use, that is, empty houses that local authorities may have taken time to repair and so on. We all know about that in our different constituencies. The Minister moved very quickly to say we do not want any voids and to give local authorities the resources to bring such houses back into use as quickly as they are vacated for whatever reason. The cost-rental initiative he has undertaken is also proving to be very effective. It took the past 15 to 18 months to get that new scheme up and running and it is proving to be very effective and impactful.

Ultimately, it is about supply. We need to be building more housing and we are doing so.

Deputy Matt Carthy

The Taoiseach said the homelessness issue goes to the heart of the type of society we want to be. What does it say about our society under his Government that homelessness figures are rising month on month and are now reaching what would be the horrendous scandal of a figure of 11,000? These are real people. They are people's sons, daughters, nieces, nephews and neighbours. The Taoiseach indicated the conditions need to be right. What conditions precisely do we need to justify an eviction ban, considering those numbers? He indicated that during the Covid crisis, the conditions were right for an eviction ban. I contend the conditions now are such that it is absolutely essential for an eviction ban to be put in place. Of course an eviction ban is not the solution to the housing crisis. The solution is to build houses. However, in the here and now, I ask the Taoiseach again: will he ensure an eviction ban is put in place as a matter of absolute urgency?

The Taoiseach

The conditions that existed in the Covid crisis were that we legally restricted people's movements, on public health grounds, to distances of 2 km early on and 5 km in some instances. There was a very clear legal underpinning for any decisions we took, given the restrictions the Government and public health interests put forward. In the context of the current crisis, there are arguments, of course, to do the same. That is the point and the matter is under consideration by the Minister in respect of that aspect of it.

More fundamentally, we need to build more houses. The Government has increased the allocation and we are getting more houses built. This year, we will reach our target-----

Deputy Matt Carthy

Tenants need support now.

The Taoiseach

------in terms of the overall number of houses built. The reality is that looking at the figures on home completions, commencements, permissions, home purchases, first-time buyers and mortgage draw downs, they are encouraging this year. They give us confidence that the Government's overall 2022 supply target will be met, but we need to go higher than that every other year. That means, and I have said it consistently to everybody in the House, that if we want to reach those targets into the future and we really want to provide the supply that will be needed to reduce homelessness, then we all need to put the shoulder to the wheel and ensure that in every local authority in the country we allow housing projects through and get them through.

Deputy Ivana Bacik

I want to acknowledge, first, that the tragedy in Creeslough overshadows all other issues and matters that we are going to deal with in this House today.

However, I would like to raise the plight of many thousands of people across this country, who work for independent non-State agencies in the care, community and voluntary sectors. I refer to section 39, section 10 and section 56 workers and all of those in the community sector who need a pay rise. They are among the heroes of Irish society, filling the gaps left where the State has been incapable of providing. It is no exaggeration to say that without their work, many of society's most vulnerable members would be left disconnected from communities. We know they provide vital services across the State, supporting those suffering from mental health crises and extending a helping hand to people who have lost their homes. Without a winter eviction ban, there may well be more of those people needing their help. Such workers give support and advice to those victimised by sexual and domestic violence. Yet, despite their immense value to society, care workers are not valued as they should be. Many have not seen a pay rise since 2008, nearly 15 years ago, and too often lip service is paid to them with no material improvement to their pay and conditions.

Many of us stood in the streets and applauded vital health and care workers during the darkest days of the Covid pandemic, but we know that applause will not pay their bills. Indeed, they are among the 100,000 non-HSE staff who still have not been paid the Covid bonus promised to them in January, in recognition of their work on the front lines of Ireland's pandemic response. Nursing Homes Ireland, NHI, handed in letters to the Department of Health at 12 noon today, looking for their payments. It is just not fair that they have still not received those payments. Their work is comparable to that of workers who are directly employed by the State, but unlike trade union members in the public or private sector, care workers in the voluntary sector have no way to negotiate a pay increase at present. Up and down the country, in recent months, they have taken to picket lines to highlight this inequality and disparity in treatment. Because their contracts are not made directly with the State, Government Ministers have been able to claim, repeatedly, that the dispute and the issue around pay and conditions has nothing to do with them.

We, in Labour, want to address that inequality to ensure that there is redress for those workers who are providing such vital care and community services. Tomorrow, we will bring forward a motion proposed by my colleague, Deputy Duncan Smith, to reverse the policy which excludes these care workers from mechanisms like the public sector pay agreements. We are calling on the Taoiseach and his Government to support our initiative. We are asking for Government Deputies to back this important motion to see equality for those providing vital care and community services. Indeed, I raised the issue with the Tánaiste last Thursday and he said then that €100 million in once-off funding for section 39 organisations would cover the cost of pay rises. I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that workers will get pay rises in accordance with that, and in line with their colleagues who are working directly for the State.

The Taoiseach

First, I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. At the outset, that Labour's motion is very broad. At times it is not clear who, specifically, it is targeting. At one leap, it is almost as if every voluntary and community organisation would be made a public sector organisation, if one were to follow the entirety of the motion through to its logical conclusion. As the Deputy knows, quite a number of these organisations are private, appreciate their autonomy and would not necessarily want to come under public sector ownership or remit. We need to think this through. I acknowledge that there is an issue here. That is the first point. There is certainly an issue in terms of section 39 organisations or those that have a direct relationship with the State. The section 39 organisations are privately owned and run and have terms and conditions of employment for staff and so on.

Those arrangements would traditionally have been between the employer and the employee. However, we know that, in some instances, they are contracted with the State for the services they provide. Their employees are similar to those employed by State organisations, so that creates an issue in terms of the differential in pay. In acknowledgement of the particular difficulties they are facing this year with inflation, we have allocated up to €100 million to support section 39 organisations and nursing homes, as well as section 38 organisations, excluding acute hospitals. That is additional funding to help them cope until the end of the year with the crisis and cost-of-living issue.

Section 10 organisations deal with homelessness and housing authorities. They are separate organisations, not State organisations. The money that the State provides through section 10 funding goes towards the cost of services provided by front-line NGOs. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage provides the framework that governs how those housing authorities operate. Additional funding of €21 million has been allocated this year, bringing the total to approximately €215 million.

The Labour Party motion also covers Tusla-funded organisations. Section 56(2) of the Child and Family Agency Act requires that Tusla determines the maximum funding it proposes to make available during the course of each year under each arrangement and the level of contracted service it expects to receive in return for that funding. Tusla's funding allocation has been increased for 2022.

The overall point is that we are talking about a vast number of people and organisations. The situation is not as simple as is being portrayed. That said, the Government will enter a process, as happened in 2019 at the Workplace Relations Commission. We anticipate getting into some process to try to sort this out once and for all.

Deputy Ivana Bacik

I thank the Taoiseach for the response and for acknowledging there is an issue here, which there clearly is. As the Taoiseach has said, a large number of people are involved, including a large number of service users, people who are relying on the vital services provided by these care workers and community workers. The service users need to know that the services which enable them to live their lives will continue in the future. We need a Government commitment to multi-annual funding. We need to know what the €100 million is to be targeted at. Is it to be targeted at pay rises or the cost of living? Fundamentally, we need to know that the services provided will be capable of being continued because they are vital to our communities across the country.

I am glad to hear the Taoiseach say the Government will be entering a process. Will the Government support our motion tomorrow? Will it engage with the unions, those representing workers in the sector, to ensure these vital services are continued? SIPTU is holding a press conference as we speak in Buswells Hotel, calling for justice for those in the care and community sectors who are providing the same services as those provided directly by individuals employed by the HSE. They are providing the same services, albeit through contracts with different organisations.

The Taoiseach

I thank the Deputy. In the health sector in recent years, for example, upward adjustments have been made in the pay of some eligible section 39 workers, following a process led by the Department of Health and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform at the Workplace Relations Commission in 2019. That resulted in funding being made available for pay increases for a pilot scheme involving 50 agencies. In 2021, there was further engagement by the Department of Health at the Workplace Relations Commission, which resulted in funding being made available for pay increases for cohorts of staff in the remaining 250 agencies identified in 2019. This decision was final in respect of the number of organisations that were to be funded. That is an illustration of an earlier process to deal with an earlier, parallel situation similar to the one we have now after Building Momentum and the recent public sector pay agreement, which was negotiated and voted for by the social partners. In my view, some process has to entered into.

I caution that the Labour Party motion is of such a breadth as to almost be indeterminate as to which organisations would be covered. It is vast. However, we need to get into some process to get the issues resolved for these organisations.

Deputy Ivana Bacik

A wide range of services is involved.

Deputy Mick Barry

I visited the PrepayPower website this morning.

The website states: "If you do not keep your PPP PAYG [PrepayPower pay-as-you-go] Meter topped up with credit, it will self-disconnect and your electricity supply will cut off." On vulnerable customers, it states that:

The CRU has put in place a rule whereby [registered] Vulnerable Customers cannot be disconnected for non-payment of [arrears] during winter months. [This applies to both gas and electricity.] It is important that all of our customers ... categorised as Vulnerable ... understand that this rule cannot apply to them whilst on our [pay-as-you-go] supply.

This is five days after the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications met representatives of this company and hailed the exchanges as a result for prepay customers. Are there minutes of this meeting? Can we see them please?

While I am at it, if energy companies are being spoken to as stakeholders, why is the Minister not also speaking to pay-as-you-go customers? Are they not stakeholders too or are some stakeholders more important than others? The Minister might learn a thing or two if he bothered to speak to customers. He might hear about the households that never stock the freezer up full for fear of the electricity going off. He might hear about the housing estates where security alarms go off every Friday in homes that cannot afford to top up their electricity before payday. He might hear about the contempt people have for the phrase "self-disconnect", which trips so easily from the lips of energy bosses and some Government Deputies these days.

I am sure the Taoiseach has realised this but I will spell it out for him just in case he has not; the news is not good for him or his Government if the moratorium does not mean a moratorium for all and unless there are zero disconnections this winter. If that does not happen, the personal stories of people who have been disconnected will be read aloud every day in this Chamber and his promise that there will be no disconnections will come back to haunt him. Is this what he wants in the run-up to 15 December? Is this what the Tánaiste wants in the days following that date? It is now time to go harder with these energy companies. I await the Taoiseach's reply to the questions.

The Taoiseach

The Government does not want disconnections this winter above all else. As the Deputy said, for winter 2022 the usual one-month pause on disconnections for non-payment has been extended to three months, from 1 December 2022 until 28 February 2023. For vulnerable customers, the pause on disconnections for non-payment has been extended to six months, from 1 October 2022 until 31 March 2023. I understand that work is now being progressed by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, to waive the fee to enable people to switch from pay-as-you-go to bill pay in order to avail of the protections for vulnerable customers.

The Minister has met industry representatives. The understanding is that it is an industry standard not to disconnect at weekends. Emergency credit is available to get people through until they can again purchase credit. In respect of engagement, the entire objective is that no-one will be disconnected and emergency credits can be made available. The most recent additional protections that have been put in place by the CRU in respect of pay-as-you-go include debt repayment levels being reduced from 10% from a previous rate of 25% and the €20 top-up, for example. These are additional protections by the CRU but in terms of social protection, the additional needs payment is always there for anybody who is in difficulty in order for them to get additional funding to top up, as well as engaging with the Money Advice & Budgeting Service, MABS, which also has a pattern of engagement with the energy companies.

As part of their codes of practice, companies do not want to disconnect anybody and there is a way to prevent that. There are also the budget measures we introduced, which are quite significant, between now and the end of the year. The annual cost-of-living double payment will commence on 17 October from which approximately 1.4 million people will benefit.

A double child benefit payment will be made on 1 November to 639,000 families in respect of 1.2 million children. The fuel allowance lump sum of €400 will be paid the week commencing 14 November and 371,000 people will benefit from that. A payment of €200 will be made to people who are in receipt of the living alone allowance, commencing on 14 November. A €500 cost-of-living payment will be made to those in receipt of the working family payment. These payments will commence on 14 November and 44,000 people will benefit. A disability support grant of €500 will commence payment on 14 November. A further 216,000 people will benefit from that. There is also a €500 carer's support grant to be paid in the week commencing on 21 November. The entirety of the measures we provided for in the budget and which will be rolled out and paid out to people from now until the end of the year will provide strong capacity and back-up to people who are in difficulty in respect of income or anything else in topping up their payment mechanisms.

Deputy Mick Barry

Those measures will get many pay-as-you-go customers through this winter, no doubt, but will they get all pay-as-you-go customers through the winter? I do not believe that is the case nor do I believe the Taoiseach believes it to be the case either. He said that the fee has been waived for pay-as-you-go customers who want to transfer to bill-pay if they are vulnerable. That is very good but it is for medically vulnerable people. The fee has been waived for people who have sleep apnoea and need to use a CPAP machine at night but what about people who are financially vulnerable? What about people who are living in poverty? As of now, such people do not have the right to transfer from pay-as-you-go to bill-pay without paying penalties. These penalties are very considerable. Does the Taoiseach know what the penalty charge for pay-as-you-go customers who are financially vulnerable and living in poverty and who want to switch to bill-pay is? It is €199. The charges have been removed for those who are medically vulnerable. Will they be removed for those who are financially vulnerable? Will they be removed for all? This has to be a moratorium for all and not just for some.

The Taoiseach

We have identified a whole range of measures that will be paid out from now until Christmas that will help the financially vulnerable. Substantial payments are being made which should help people not to get into difficulty with their pay-as-you-go bill. That said, the additional needs payment is there. Anybody who is financially vulnerable should engage with the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, and with the additional needs section to ensure they get the resources so they are not in a debt situation in respect of their pay-as-you-go service and to get it resolved. We will continue to engage with the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, to ensure there are protections over the winter period against anybody being disconnected. It is our view and the view of the industry that this is not standard practice. If the Deputy has material to bring to our attention in respect of vulnerable customers with whom he is contact, I will gladly receive it. We can use it to work on further solutions. However, across the board, from the CRU protections to the budgetary welfare announcements we have made and the various supports we are providing and the social protection additional needs scheme that is in place with MABS, we believe we can protect people from being disconnected.

Deputy Cathal Berry

We all go to retirement presentations from time to time. They are really important because they allow us to acknowledge and recognise the contributions of particular workers to particular workplaces. What is perhaps even more important is that retirement presentations signal to the remaining workforce that their contributions are also appreciated and valued. I mention this because I will today raise the precarious employment contracts enlisted members of the Defence Forces are forced to accept, particularly those contracts for sergeants who are approaching their 50th birthday. Many people may not be aware of this but a 50-year-old sergeant must retire on his or her birthday. Under the circumstances, when you consider the retention crisis and the fact that our 50-year-old sergeants are the most experienced, respected and motivated people we have, this appears to be madness.

That is a big issue that needs be addressed. We need to focus on how to improve things from a sergeant's perspective.

I have two questions for the Taoiseach. Does he know anything about the terms and conditions upon which these new sergeants' contracts will be approved? In fairness to the Minister for Defence, he accepts that a sergeant's career should be extended to around 55 years of age. We have yet to see the terms and conditions they will be re-engaged on.

The Taoiseach

Is this about new sergeants being appointed?

Deputy Cathal Berry

That is correct. There are a lot of rumours going around and there are some proposals on the table that 50-year-old sergeants will be forced to retire and be rehired on their birthdays, with drastically reduced terms and conditions for pensions and pay. I find that unacceptable and the Taoiseach probably feels the same. I do not think anyone would try to chance that with a garda, a nurse or a teacher. Does the Taoiseach know when these terms and conditions will be available? Will he intercede with his Cabinet colleagues to ensure that military personnel who are 50 years of age will get a fair hearing when it comes to terms and conditions?

The Taoiseach

I thank the Deputy for raising this. It is an important issue given the overall situation and to the need to enhance retention and recruitment in the context of the Defence Forces. As the Deputy will know, a civil-military review of mandatory retirement ages and service limits of all ranks in the Permanent Defence Force has been conducted and the recommendations arising from the review and their impact on current pay and pensions are being considered by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. That consideration is ongoing. In December 2021, the Ministers for Defence and Public Expenditure and Reform both agreed that arrangements would be made to facilitate the extension of service limits of sergeants recruited to the Permanent Defence Force since 1994. I will not go through the rest of the note because it refers to those wonderful layers of complexity involved in resolving these issues. I could read all sorts of things into that. In short, I will talk to both Ministers. We need to get this expedited.

I have no doubt that there are some complexities because there are certain pension entitlements at the age of 50. Obviously, people going beyond that age has implications and there are relativities and all of that. I am told that the complexity surrounding any extension of service relates to the pension entitlements associated with the mandatory retirement age limits. What the Deputy is hearing may relate to that. We do not want people to be disadvantaged by staying on beyond the age of 50. The Government certainly does not want that. I want to create incentives for people to stay beyond 50. In the modern era, it makes sense. We would then be in a position to retain their experience and expertise and reduce the brain drain from the Defence Forces. I will revert to the Deputy. I will talk to the Ministers about this.

Deputy Cathal Berry

The reason I mention this is that it is the most pressing issue relating to the Defence Forces at the moment. It goes back to the comment I made about retirement functions at the start. This will only affect eight sergeants over the next 12 months.

The Taoiseach

Eight.

Deputy Cathal Berry

Yes. It is just eight troops but there are 8,000 troops watching very carefully to see how those eight people are treated. That is where the real downstream consequences are. We should be mindful that the Dublin Airport Authority tried something similar two years ago and we saw where that ended up. It was unable to fulfil its mandate and the public suffered accordingly. The take-home message is that the public service should be the employer of choice when it comes to employment rights. We should not just meet the standard; we should be the standard.

The Taoiseach

Even as he spoke, the Deputy illustrated some of the knock-on effects that can happen, so obviously the matter needs some consideration. The overall objective is to retain and extend the numbers working in the Defence Forces. We have to find a way through that and do it expeditiously. I will talk to both Ministers in respect of the issue.