Vol. 1050 No. 3
1. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science in relation to the new student accommodation policy for which he sought Cabinet approval, if he can he provide details of the refurbishment grant which he had outlined. [9106/24]
I ask the Minister to provide the details of the refurbishment grant for university student accommodation. Can he confirm as he had stated previously that it was the universities that had requested this?
I thank Deputy Farrell for this important question. As she knows, I recently received Government approval for an overarching policy approach for student accommodation in Ireland. This policy looks at a number of ways to stimulate supply of student accommodation, including standardised design, continued promotion of the rent-a-room scheme and recognition of the Government's commitment to reactivating vacant and derelict properties.
I am developing schemes to enable the repurposing of existing on-campus buildings or refurbishment of vacant properties located close to campuses as student accommodation, in consultation and alignment with initiatives being led by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.
Many campuses are located in regional towns and cities where vacancy rates are higher. Government policy in this area, through the Town Centre First policy document identifies the need to bring vibrancy back to town centres through residential development. Refurbished properties also benefit from a much lower carbon footprint. Through the vacant property refurbishment grant under the Croí Cónaithe Towns Fund, 6,697 applications have been received to date, of which 3,764 have been approved.
All local authorities, which now have a dedicated full-time vacant homes officer, are currently undertaking a survey of vacant and derelict properties. The Department of housing has provided data on vacancy and facilitated engagement for my departmental officials with local authority officials, who have knowledge and information on relevant vacant properties. My officials and the higher education sector are working with these officers to identify suitable proposals for review.
I have written to the technological universities and asked them to send in proposals and ideas by 15 March. This week a workshop is taking place with all of them along with the HEA. We want to build purpose-built student accommodation. Like the Deputy, we also want to see if anything can be done quicker and we believe refurbishing vacant properties will be part of this. I have heard this from the presidents of technological universities as I have travelled around the country. Sometimes it might be on campus and more likely than not it might be accommodation nearby. Sinn Féin's policy document on housing and Government policy on housing recognise the value of looking at vacant property. I want students also to be able to benefit from that.
I am somewhat perplexed by this whole thing. I am unclear as to why Cabinet approval was needed. I have concerns about how fully it was thought through. In 2022 the Irish Independent reported that: "Higher Education Minister Simon Harris is today seeking Government approval for a strategy around State investment in campus accommodation." This was to involve a "Grant paid to colleges, to allow for repurposing of vacant housing stock to accommodate students." I do not understand why Cabinet approval was needed for that when, according to the Irish Independent, it was already under way in 2022. I cannot understand why, as the Minister said, the universities requested this when they do not seem to have any real vacant or derelict stock. From my own the questioning of them, so far I have only been able to identify 80 beds. Why would they ask for grants which most will not be able to use? I know now what the Minister stated today and I also understand that at the committee earlier today there was talk about commercial units, vacant units as well. This was not previously mentioned in that announcement.
As the Deputy knows, on a number of occasions I have brought to Cabinet short-term policy approaches that we could take to get student accommodation activated, particularly where they had planning permission. More recently, I did bring that longer term policy approach. That had a number of elements, including the vacancy element. There is not much of a mystery here. For the first time in the history of this State we want to provide taxpayers' funds to technological universities to help them build student accommodation. We want to help them to build student accommodation but we also want to help them to activate accommodation that may be available in their region. I have figures here from all local authorities that are home to a HEI campus and very significant numbers of properties have been deemed to be derelict.
For example, in the Deputy's city, Galway, there are 425 vacant properties and 32 derelict properties. I want to see if our universities can play a part in bringing some of them back to life as short-term solutions for student accommodation. That is simply it and we are looking forward to proposals coming in on what technological believe they can do by 15 March.
This is a bit different from what I understood and many people would have understood from the original announcement of this policy. First, it was not clear that the Minister was talking about commercial units as well. It was not clear that he was only talking about technological universities. My understanding from the committee meeting we had was that it applied to the university sector in general and the Minister had stated that the universities had requested this. I submitted parliamentary questions and I even submitted a freedom of information request but I have not been able to find records of the universities requesting this. I had also done research on how many vacant properties were available on campus. All I could find was that it would add 80 beds. It was not clear that the Minister was talking about commercial properties. Has he just now decided to add to it because the reality is this is not something that exists on university campuses? I would be interested in the Minister's view on that.
I am a little bit perplexed about the line of inquiry but we want to come at this from every possible angle. We know there are vacant properties in the regions and in many towns where HEIs are based. The Deputy is correct when she says it is not just for technological universities but for any universities, although I think it will be of particular benefit to our technological universities. I already know of two universities that have been linking with my Department. They believe they have identified vacant buildings in their region and they are looking forward to putting proposals in place.
Commercial-----
I do not believe these are in that space. We need to look at every way of coming at this. I know the Deputy agrees on this. We want to build purpose-built student accommodation, whether in DCU or Maynooth, but we know that it takes time to get from an idea through design, planning and construction. There could be opportunities in the meantime to look at vacant stock. I want to cast the net wide and invite our universities to bring forward their proposals by 15 March.
3. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science following on from his confirmation that his officials were examining the issue of 51-week leases for purpose-built student accommodation, if he can update on same. [9105/24]
I seek confirmation the Minister's officials are examining the issue of 51-week leases for purpose-built student accommodation and ask for an update on that.
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. I have been working closely with the Minister for housing, Deputy O'Brien, on this matter. I thank him and his Department and officials for their continued support and engagement. We both agree the actions of these providers is unacceptable. While a 51-week lease may suit some third level students - perhaps those who require to be in a university for a longer period than the traditional college year - it is not desirable or affordable for the majority of students and we intend to take actions to mitigate what could become a barrier in some cases to accessing higher education. This week I will be writing to the local authority in Dublin and to other relevant local authorities and seeking an urgent assessment from them to ascertain if providers are operating in compliance with specific planning conditions for the developments. I may have my view on that but it is not for me to make that determination. It is important that the local authorities carry out that urgent assessment because providers must operate in accordance with specific planning permission for developments.
In addition to that, I would like to see the law changed in this area. The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, and I are examining legislative amendments to make sure contracts are prioritised for students in the academic year under the Residential Tenancies Act. I thank the Minister for his continued work on that.
Students should continue to contact providers directly to ascertain the availability of their accommodation for the academic year. Under the residential tenancies Act 2016, landlords cannot ask anyone to pay more than the equivalent of two months' rent to secure a tenancy. It is important we continue in this Chamber to amplify that message. I also ask students and families to familiarise themselves with the terms and conditions of their lease agreements before entering into same. I remind all students that student accommodation is within the remit of the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, which provides a confidential dispute resolution service. A student can contact the RTB with a complaint or dispute regarding their accommodation. This is an area I want to see progress in.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I welcome that because it is an issue of huge concern among students. It is reflective of the wider housing crisis. The delivery of purpose-built student accommodation by large vulture funds is becoming mainstream and common, meaning many students are relying on it, so much so that vulture funds have more student beds in Dublin than all the Dublin universities combined. The same goes for Cork and I am concerned the same will be the case for Galway in time. For the joys of sleeping in a room that is the size of the average car parking space, students are paying over a grand a month.
As if that was not bad enough, now we are hearing about 51-week leases. Not only students but also parents have been in touch with me. They cannot pay the 39 weeks, which is the usual academic year; now they have to pay an entire calendar year. I welcome the progress and hope we can get this sorted before many people are caught in the trap of the 51-week lease.
I am not satisfied about the 51-week contract situation. I intend to reach out to the local authorities this week to ask them to carry out an urgent assessment and I intend to work with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, on legislative change in the area. This highlights the need to be less reliant on the private market and to build more college-owned student accommodation. It is the reason we are activating the building of student accommodation in DCU and Maynooth, the reason we are trying to work with UCD and Trinity to get those projects over the line and the reason we have the Higher Education Authority meeting this week with the universities, inviting them to develop proposals, send in ideas for the development of new accommodation or the refurbishment of vacant accommodation and get those proposals into us by 15 March. It is the reason we have changed our approach to student accommodation. We need to make sure we have more college-owned stock.
We are taking a number of measures on affordability. Reducing college fees this year for 96,000 students helped, as did increasing the student grants from January. Extending the renter's tax credit makes a real difference, putting €750 back in the pockets of students or their parents.
Yes, but we also need to be frank here. Because of the over-reliance on the private sector, specifically now on vulture funds for providing purpose-built student accommodation, we are in this crisis. Of course I want to see purpose-built student accommodation by universities at an affordable rate.
I have a few concerns. It does not seem to me there will be a move towards TUs being able to borrow. It will be an issue of public-private partnerships. That has not worked in the past. I am concerned about that. I am also concerned about the vacant property refurbishment grant bearing fruit until I see it in action. Parents are paying €14,000 for rent and that is having an impact on people being able to access third level education. I hear what the Minister is saying but until I see action I am deeply concerned.
It is the Deputy's job and duty to keep a watchful eye on this and she will do that well but by any objective measure we have seen an increase in college-owned student accommodation and in general student accommodation this college year compared to last year. We have seen more measures to help students with the cost of rent this year than last year and an increase in the student grant this year compared to last year. We saw a reduction in the college fees this year and also last year. We are making tangible efforts to help with the cost of education and increase accommodation supply but we have more to do.
When it comes to the technological universities, such is the scale of the challenge of meeting the housing demand that I do not think we should make ourselves prisoner to any one way of building. We need to look at all ways, whether the refurbishment of vacant stock on or near campus, the provision of devolved grants, public-private partnerships or access to the borrowing framework. We need to keep all options on the table but the first job is to get the ideas in by 15 March.
4. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science if he and his Department will consider removing the eligibility criteria exclusion of the category of parents of an Irish citizen for SUSI applications in relation to persons with permission to remain under a stamp 4 visa. [9088/24]
Once again, I ask the Minister if his Department will consider removing the eligibility criteria exclusions of the category of parents of an Irish citizen for SUSI applications in relation to persons with permission to remain under a stamp 4 visa.
I thank the Deputy and acknowledge his long-standing interest in this. The short answer is, yes, I will give consideration to this and work with the Deputy on it.
To be eligible for a student grant, an applicant has to fulfil all of the criteria of the student grant scheme, including the residency and nationality criteria. In terms of residency, a student must be ordinarily resident in Ireland, the EU, the EEA, Switzerland or the UK for at least three of the five years before embarking on an approved third level course. To qualify for a student grant, the candidate's nationality or immigration status in the State determines whether they meet the nationality requirements. The nationality requirements for the student grant scheme are set out in the Student Support Act 2011 and the student support regulations. They include a number of eligible permissions granted by the Minister for Justice; for example, refugees and dependent children of naturalised Irish citizens. When an applicant applies, the basis of their permission is examined to confirm whether it meets one of these approved permissions.
Under Article 32 of the student grant scheme, there is provision for a review of eligibility where a person’s circumstances change during the academic year. This includes a change in a student's nationality or immigration status. Where a student acquires Irish citizenship by naturalisation or is granted a category of permission to remain provided for in the legislation during the course of their studies, they may apply to SUSI to have their application reassessed, but they will only become eligible from the date of meeting the eligibility criteria.
The Deputy may be aware that my Department publishes an annual options paper on cost of education and changes to the student grant scheme. This paper sets out various costed options to stimulate debate and to inform priorities for the Estimates process. On foot of the Deputy's question, I have asked my officials to consider some options relating to immigration status and whether they could be identified and costed in the published options paper which I hope to be in a position to publish this summer. That will allow for consideration in advance of the Estimates process.
I thank the Minister. The last part of the contribution was really helpful. I want to remind the Minister that this is the third time I have brought this to Priority Questions. A response to me from Minister in March 2022 stated: "I do not wish to make the Deputy uncomfortable, but I found myself agreeing with him during the previous Question Time ... I have done some work on it and I am committing now to intensify that work to try to get a positive outcome." I do not doubt for a second that the Minister appreciates the complexity of this issue, but it is one that has a tangible and genuine impact on stamp 4 visa holders.
In terms of outlining the problem, we already know what it is. In terms of bringing about a solution, I want to work with the Minister. I ask him to give me a date when I can come into his office and possibly bring one or two people who write this question every year with me so that they can work with him to find a solution. It is having a damaging effect. What are we going to do to address this issue?
I accept the Deputy's frustration. This is an area where we have genuinely tried to do quite a bit of work as a Department over a significant period to improve the access opportunities for people through education who find themselves in Ireland through a variety of migration routes. We have made some good progress in that regard and I am proud of some of the increased supports we have put in place to help people access education and, crucially, get into the world of work and be able to make a living for themselves and their families.
We will now look at this in the context of the next scheme and see if we can make progress. My commitment in the House is that when we publish our costed options in the cost of education paper this summer, this will be included as an option and will be costed. That will help to inform the debate we may have in the House and the consideration the Government may give to the matter around the Estimates time.
The student support regulations will, I understand, be released in May for 2024. I ask for a commitment from the Minister that this will be factored into that. Is that what the Minister is committing to me, namely that stamp 4 visa holders will be costed in the student support regulation for 2024? That did not appear in the 2022 or 2023 papers. This is a perfect opportunity to address this issue. The figures may not be in the 2024 paper, but perhaps I and another person could have a meeting with the Minister to see what could be included in terms of making a change.
I am very happy to have a meeting with Deputy Gannon on the matter. I am happy to see if this can be considered and included in the new scheme. It will be included in the options paper, in terms of the cost of education measures we can take in advance of the budget. I am happy to have a meeting with Deputy Gannon and perhaps a constituent on this matter.
5. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science the steps he is taking to tackle the growing backlog of apprenticeship off the job training. [9107/24]
I am asking this question again. Regarding the backlog of apprenticeships for off-the-job training, can the Minister of State update us on what he is doing to tackle this?
I thank the Deputy for her question. We have a singular focus on securing sustained reductions in waiting times for apprenticeship training. There has been a significant reduction in the number of apprentices waiting longer than six months for their off-the-job training. The backlog stood at 3,817 in January 2024. It was as high as 5,212 in in August 2023. The progress achieved results from a cross-sectoral plan put in place by the National Apprenticeship Office for 2024. It is essential that this progress is maintained.
Successful delivery of priority Government strategies such as the national development plan, Housing for All and the Climate Action Plan require significant growth in our apprenticeship training capacity. There is now also a strong and growing recognition of apprenticeship as a valuable employment and skills opportunity, reflected in a 25% increase in craft apprenticeship registrations from 5,271 in 2019 to 6,588 in 2023.
Increased funding of €67 million allocated to apprenticeship secured through the Estimates for this year, bringing total investment to €300 million, is a vital step in building the capacity required to reduce delays in apprenticeship training and meet future training requirements. Key specific actions taken to address the backlog under the plan include education and training boards, ETBs, being mandated to deliver three intakes of apprentices a year, increasing capacity from over 5,500 places in 2023 to over 8,900 in 2024, a 60% increase. A targeted national recruitment campaign for more than 100 craft apprenticeship instructors is under way. In conclusion, it is our priority to not only respond to the backlog, but to ensure the system is right-sized to deliver future demand for skilled tradespeople.
The Minister and Minister of State have spoken positively about improving the output of craft apprenoticeships. They have also widened the opportunities for people to pursue consortia apprenticeships. However, the current situation is simply not good enough for those seeking off-the-job training. There are around 9,000 people waiting for levels 2, 4 and 6 training, which is a crazy figure.
I have been inundated with messages from young craft apprentices who have been waiting for long periods of time, which is, naturally, very frustrating for them. People have told me they have been waiting for three years, which is a significant amount of time especially when we want to keep people in the sector. For much of that time people are earning sub-minimum wage rates because they cannot complete their off-the-job training. A concern expressed to me was that while dealing with level 2 off-the-job training, levels 4 and 6 are being pushed back. Can the Minister of State confirm whether that is happening?
It is important to bear in mind that normal waiting times for off-the-job training range from three to six months. That needs to be factored in. At the end of January, there were 8,967 apprentices waiting for training. That included a figure of 3,817 who had waited more than six months. The numbers waiting have significantly reduced from a peak of almost 12,000 apprentices in August 2021.
The Deputy mentioned the craft backlog. In the summer of 2023, some data analysis showed a significant increase in the backlog. In response, we developed a plan to eliminate the backlog which was formed and led by the National Apprenticeship Office and overseen by the Department. The rapid implementation of the response plan meant that the backlog was reduced by the end of January 2024 to a figure of 3,817 I previously mentioned. This is made up of 3,622 phase 2, 100 phase 4 and 95 phase 6 apprentices.
On the issue of people being trained for level 2 off-the-job training, which is welcome, and those seeking level 4 and 6 training, is it the case that people are being moved from levels 4 and 6 off-the-job training in order to accommodate level 2 apprentices? Have I understood that correctly? That issue has been raised with me a number of times. I would like to get an understanding on that.
Registrations are up, which is obviously welcome, but off-the-job training is of huge concern to those impacted, including the impact on their wages. Some people have said it is taking them six years to finish an apprenticeship when it should not take that long. This is an issue of concern. I am interested in hearing whether the current situation affects levels 4 and 6 training.
We do not feel that is an issue. It has not been flagged to me, but we will look at it based on what the Deputy has said here today. As the Deputy knows, the national development plan, Housing for All and our climate action responsibilities and targets are a huge focus for all of us. We put significant resources into building our capacity to address the backlog which, as we know, was all down to Covid. We are not using that as an excuse, but we have to call it as it is. We are making significant inroads.
We are carrying out an instructor recruitment campaign through the National Apprenticeship Office, which has been hugely successful in trying to attract people. Everything that we can possibly do to increase capacity and bring people into off-the-job training more quickly is being done. We also have to protect the quality of the programmes these apprentices are pursuing. That is also paramount. We cannot rush the fences. We have to ensure that people work properly and learn on the job, that their off-the-job training is structured properly, that they get the necessary level of qualification and that we protect the integrity of the qualification.
