Housing Provision: Motion.

Ms O'Meara

I move:

That Seanad Éireann condemns the Government for its failure to resolve the housing crisis and, in particular, for its failure to address the scandal of homelessness.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, to the House for what he will agree is an extremely important debate on the housing crisis, particularly homelessness. There is no doubt there is a housing crisis which is not being dealt with and which is growing by the day. There is also an unprecedented level of homelessness.

The Labour Party believes that housing is a social good. However, this view is clearly not shared by the Government which sees housing in a market and commodity mindset. We believe it is a fundamental requirement that good quality housing be available and accessible to as many people as possible and that every person has and should be considered to have a right to good quality, affordable housing appropriate to their needs. We would go as far as to suggest that this right be enshrined in the Constitution and, at the very minimum, in legislation.

Housing has a particular relevance and significance for society. In light of this fact, market forces alone cannot be allowed to dictate its provision and price which they are doing to a great extent. We believe the State should intervene to ensure that in the interests of social justice and the common good, this right to good quality, affordable housing is assured for everyone who needs it and according to their needs.

Land is one of the critical resources required for housing. For this reason, when the State intervenes on behalf of the community, such as in rezoning, planning permission or the provision of infrastructure by way of roads, sewerage and so on, this should not automatically result in significant and untaxed gains for landowners. However, these are not the principles which underpin the Government's housing policy.

Housing is seen as a commodity by this Government. It regards housing as a market and, therefore, will not allow State intervention. This is particularly the view of the Progressive Democrats. We know that the house building industry is the commercial wing of Fianna Fáil and, as a result, it has been reluctant to intervene in the interests of house buyers. It has taken two failed Bacon reports for the Government finally to wake up to the need for intervention, as seen in the last legislation based on the Bacon report.

During Committee Stage of the planning Bill in the Dáil, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, admitted that a couple whose joint earnings were in the region of £40,000 could not afford to enter the housing market as first-time buyers. This situation is unprecedented in the history of the State. Home ownership, the aspiration of the vast majority of Irish people, is rapidly becoming, and has for many already become, an impossible dream. As a result, side by side with unprecedented economic prosperity, there is a crisis of home ownership and the exclusion of an increasing number of people from the aspiration to own their own homes.

The inability to enter the housing market as home owners has left people exposed to the difficult area of renting accommodation from the private sector. The Government's continuing failure to set up a structure to protect those in the private rented sector from exploitation, insecurity of tenure and so on, has added to the crisis.

It is our contention that the housing crisis is at such a level that it threatens to undermine the economic prosperity which some would claim has caused it. The labour force shortage is regularly mooted as one of the potential threats to economic prosperity but is being exacerbated by the housing crisis. How can we expect to attract Irish people living abroad if they cannot afford to buy a house when they return, despite coming back to very good incomes? Similarly, how can we expect to attract foreign workers if they are unable to afford housing in the private rented sector and who more than often find, if they do manage to get rented accommodation, that they are unprotected and have no security in that accommodation?

We are not suggesting this Government has single-handedly created the problem of rising house prices. This problem began before the Government took office but a few figures are worth citing. On average, the price of housing has gone up by £20,000 per year since this Government took office. In Dublin prices have risen by £30,000 per year. The average price of a family home when this Government took office was £84,000 but is now over £163,000. Figures indicate some stability in the past few months but this happened before and there is no reason to believe the price of houses will not continue to increase.

In the same period, the number of applicants for local authority and social housing has increased from 26,000 to 50,000. If we accept that each application involves an average of three or more people, the figure becomes 150,000 people. This is a considerable figure by any standards and one which is not being tackled by the Government.

The Government's attitude is, "Crisis? What crisis?" It is an attitude of denial. According to the Government, there is no crisis and over a considerable period of time the market will obviously meet the need. The market clearly has not met the need. Indeed, far from meeting the need, it has exacerbated the need.

If we take the issue of land, for instance, in the first debates on this issue around the time of the first Bacon report, the issue was the release of land, the availability of land. It is clear that sufficient land is zoned and available for the development of residences but it simply is not being released. It is not being used but is being hoarded. This is finally recognised in the third Bacon report and the Government's response to it. Indeed the Labour Party supported the Government's moves to penalise those who were sitting on rezoned and serviced land, those who were effectively the investors in the market. However, it took the Government a long time to recognise that and despite the fact that it is nearly six months since that legislation was enacted, there is no appreciable effect on the market, certainly from the point of view of those who are trying to enter the housing market.

What should we be doing? Clearly the answer is that the Government must intervene for the reasons which I have set out. Housing cannot be seen just as a marketing commodity. That attitude has led to the current crisis. Clearly a number of interventions are necessary. I want to look at the need for a major initiative on, and a rapid increase in, local authority and social and voluntary housing. We all know from our experience as public representatives, particularly those of us who have experience as members of local authorities, that the social and voluntary housing project is extremely successful. There is local initiative and flexibility to meet the needs, particularly of those who, although they might qualify for the local authority housing lists, find themselves in a situation where they may never be housed. I am thinking particularly, for instance, of single people, returned emigrants and elderly people who will never be housed and who are reliant on the local authority.

If this initiative is to take place, two things must be done. First, a national housing authority must be established. Clearly we are facing such an unprecedented need for house building and new dwellings that the need for serious intervention by a particular body, established with the specific purpose of driving and co-ordinating the provision of housing, must be taken on board. Our proposal is the establishment of a national housing authority which would be responsible, as other authorities are in other areas, for spearheading a plan to meet the need, estimated to be 500,000 new dwellings over the next ten years. One in every three houses which are needed by 2012, must be built over the next decade. Clearly that need will not be met, judging by the current pace of development. Therefore, it is critical that a single agency, with a single plan designed to meet this need, is established. Provision can no longer be left to the traditional sources of private house building and local authority housing. It simply will not work, hence the need for a single authority.

On local authority and social housing, earlier this year the figure for applicants on local authority housing lists and various other forms of social housing, to which I referred earlier, was 50,000 – I would venture that that figure has increased and is closer to 60,000. Despite the fact that overall house construction has doubled in the past five or six years, the number in the local authority and voluntary housing sector has remained static. Clearly this need is not being met, despite the best efforts of the local authorities in this area and the popularity of voluntary and social housing programmes. It simply is not enough to meet the massive increase needed in this area. Therefore, we propose a front-loaded programme for the construction of 50,000 local authority houses in this area.

On the regulation of the housing market, as I stated, there is clearly a need for intervention, particularly in the private rented sector. My colleague, Senator Ryan, will deal with the area of homelessness which forms part of the motion. I commend the motion to the House and look forward to the debate here.

Mr. Ryan

I second the motion. The issue of homelessness and, indeed, housing provision and how one deals with it is a classic example of the distinction between Boston and Berlin, which the Minister of State's leader so eloquently put on the record. In the United States one falls through the network and that proves one is a wimp and a failure, and that is what the Minister's party believes in. In the tradition for which we stand the belief is that those who fall through the net are the victims of an unfair society who deserve the resources of society to protect and defend them.

The Minister of State's activities are in direct contradiction of the rhetoric of his party leader because he talks like a European social democrat while his party leader practises like a George Bush Republican. It is a contradiction which is increasingly being exposed to all of us.

The document the Minister of State produced last May is a very commendable document. It is the best coherent strategy for dealing with homelessness which has been produced, and I accept that he produced it. However, he was three years in office before that document was produced. If that is our timescale to deal with a crisis, what do we do with the problems of society which are not crises?

Let us be very clear. Living on the street or in a hostel or shelter is a crisis – the number of people in that position doubled between 1996 and 1999. It is a personal crisis for the individual and it is a collective crisis for a society which finds it acceptable.

I do not have a stick with which to beat a Minister of State for the things he inherited, nor do I have a desire to defend things which happened prior to his term of office, but three years was too long to produce a strategy when all the issues were clear. For 20 years the entire voluntary sector was saying what needed to be done and, therefore, the issue which inhibited everything for so long, the issue of money, was the one issue which did not inhibit this Minister of State and the Government. It was about policy, strategy and implementation. We got the strategy last May and it is a good strategy, but the test of the strategy is implementation, which is astonishingly, offensively and painfully slow. It is astonishing that it took us until May this year to recognise that local authorities were play-acting with the issue of section 10 grants, that some people, in the case of my own city, were paying as little as £6.50 a night and telling voluntary organisations and their members that the reason they could not pay more was that the Department of the Environment and Local Government would not agree to it. That was not true, but for years they were allowed to say things like that.

Let me tell the House what has happened. One of the important recommendations on page 5 of the Minister of State's strategy is that local authorities and health boards in full partnership with the voluntary sector will draw up action plans. Cork Corporation had a few chats with the voluntary sector. They all made submissions and an action plan was then submitted to their members and approved without any further input from the voluntary sector and was sent to the Minister's Department. That was an action plan from the corporation. The Southern Health Board has been fooling around with consultations throughout the entirety of Cork and Kerry when the crisis in homelessness is in Cork city. It does not know what it thinks about it yet as it has to consult everybody in the health board about it. That is what we have to deal with.

There is no sense of crisis. Some 5,500 people are, effectively, close to living on the streets in this country. The country is awash with money and caring agencies, like health boards and local authorities, are moving on this issue with the same sense of urgency they have regarding every other issue, that is, it will be done in their own good time under their own good auspices.

That is the failure of this Government – the failure to drive the strategy it conceived. It is a strategy that was pre-written for it by the voluntary sector over 20 years. There is nothing in this strategy that has not been sought unanimously by the voluntary sector for 20 years. There is nothing in this strategy that every adviser that ever advised the Minister on homelessness did not know about.

This strategy, which ultimately miraculously emerged, was not the issue. The issue was the unwillingness to implement such a coherent strategy at local level – a lack of imagination. The eternal problem was that for years local authorities said homelessness was not their issue but was the problem of the health boards. The immortal survey carried out by Dún Laoghaire Borough Council identified no homeless people in Dún Laoghaire because it did not know where to look for them as it was not its problem. This happened all over the country. We sorted that out after about five false starts. Having done that, we now have a situation where, because so much emphasis was put on local authority provision of social housing, supported housing, the health boards are trying to say it is not their problem any more.

In the words of a senior official of the Southern Health Board, it was pulled kicking and struggling to a housing forum in Cork to discuss this issue because it did not think it was one of its concerns. That is why Government is failing in this area. It is failing because it does not recognise that of all the issues of housing, the issue of homelessness will or will not be dealt with on a local level and it will be dealt with to the degree to which the voluntary sector is supported, involved, funded and listened.

The Minister has listened to the voluntary sector. The tragedy is that people at local level in health boards and local authorities have not listened to the voluntary sector and have decided that consultation means once-off listening. They regard that as partnership. Partnership is a process of equality – it is not other people making inputs and then somebody else deciding. If we used the local authority and health board model of partnership in terms of our national partnership, it would mean that employers, farmers and trade unions would make submissions to Government and then Government would decide what they were all to get. Real partnership means negotiation and agreement to which everybody subscribes. It is the Government's job to make that sort of partnership work. If it does not make it work, we will end up with a problem running out of control.

The other issue is resources. While it is welcome that funding has increased, it is worth pointing out that in 1992, 749 units of accommodation were approved at a cost of £2.74 million. In 1999, 163 units – almost one fifth of that – were provided at a cost of £7.84 million. The problem is maybe three times as big as it was in 1992 but the number of units of accommodation provided in 1999 is one fifth, or one quarter, of what it was in 1992 and the cost is going to be four or five times greater.

The fundamental problem in all of this is the absence of low cost accommodation. A strategy which does no more than stabilise house prices will still leave a huge section of our population excluded from the housing market, unable to pay either rent or mortgage. They will be the people from whom the individual tragedies and crises of homelessness will come. The Government's job is to stop that happening but that will not be done simply by producing a strategy. It is the Government's job to make that strategy work. So far, all the evidence shows that it is not happening.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): Senator Walsh will move an amendment to the motion which I will commend. I am very pleased to come back to the House to have a further discussion on the housing issue, the Government's policy and its implementation. I will give the House as much information as I can on how that is proceeding.

I reject out of hand the assertion made at the start of Senator O'Meara's contribution which sought to imply that the Government's only interest in housing was as a marketable commodity. I utterly reject that approach. That is not the case. Government policy has been stated numerous times. I will not allow her, or any other Senator, to allege that is my policy as long as I have responsibility for this portfolio which I consider to be of the utmost importance.

The people of greatest concern to me are the people who have no home. The people about whom Senator Ryan has just spoken are my greatest concern and I cannot say that I would argue with a lot of what he said on the homelessness issue. I hope the plans we have put in place, which I will outline, will come to fruition and all the people who are in that situation will be adequately provided for. The housing needs of families who do not have adequate housing and are on our waiting lists and of those unfortunate people who are sleeping rough are our, and my, major concern. We have taken an enormous number of measures to ensure they will be provided for. It is entirely wrong to make the assertion Senator O'Meara did. The arrogance of that assertion is astonishing.

Mr. Costello

It is three times worse than when the Minister came into office.

An Cathaoirleach

Allow the Minister to make his contribution without interruption.

Last year's record housing output of over 46,500 new houses will be exceeded this year. The latest leading indicators of housing supply, coupled with progress made on the Action on Housing initiatives announced in June, suggest that we are now on target to achieve 50,000 housing completions this year and even further increases in coming years. We are building new houses at by far the highest rate in Europe in relation to our population and at an almost unbelievable five times the rate being achieved by our nearest neighbour, the UK.

The implementation of the Action on Housing supply measures is being pursued urgently. Action has been taken to ensure the housing supply measures are driven and co-ordinated effectively to bring forward land for housing more quickly. We have introduced incentives to guarantee an ongoing supply of serviced housing land. Action has also been taken to deal effectively with planning and infrastructural constraints in order to maximise the potential of available land. Getting the maximum benefit from the supply of building land is a key element of the Government's strategy and increased density is crucial to achieve this. We have, accordingly, introduced planning guidelines to increase residential density at appropriate locations.

Eleven candidate residential strategic development zones with the potential to deliver 41,000 housing units have now been identified and are being subjected to detailed analysis. We intend to designate the first tranche of SDZs later this month. Project offices already established by local authorities to drive key housing related infrastructural projects in key areas are being strengthened and new project offices are being established.

Furthermore, in Action on Housing the Government adopted a number of measures, including changes to stamp duty, to ease the burden on first-time buyers and owner occupiers and to discourage speculative investment which was negatively impacting on the ability of first-time buyers to enter the market. We rebalanced the rates of stamp duties to improve the affordability of reasonably priced second-hand houses for first-time purchasers and to prevent investors pricing first-time buyers out of the market. A temporary anti-speculative tax was also introduced for a period of three years to discourage short-term speculative investment by those seeking to make a quick capital gain. Exemptions have been provided for landlords who comply with specific regulatory requirements, thereby indicating their commitment to the long-term availability of the accommodation for renting.

In spite of continuing high demand, the effects of increased output are being reflected in moderating house price trends since house price inflation peaked in 1998. The most recent house price figures available for the September quarter provide strong evidence of a moderation in the rate of house price increase, particularly new house prices. I hope to be in a position to publish very positive price trend figures within the next few days.

It is generally accepted by most reasonable commentators that the Government's actions have played a key role in achieving house price slowdown. This is a very positive achievement against the background of continued economic growth and low interest rates. Sustained increases in housing output and reduced investor activity are the key factors underlying this moderation.

There is also firm evidence that first-time buyers are gaining an increasing share of the new housing market as the targeted tax measures to curb speculative investment take effect. This shift is due to reduced investor activity in response to the taxation measures introduced in Action on Housing and the sustained increases in housing output.

Most importantly, we have significantly expanded the social housing programmes. We have, for the first time, provided a long-term framework for the funding of social and affordable housing through the inclusion of £6 billion in the national development plan. Funding under this heading and for housing related infrastructure was further increased by almost £1 billion in Action on Housing, reflecting the commitment of the Government to tackle social and affordable housing needs. This investment will ensure that the housing needs of almost 100,000 households will be met with Government assistance over the seven year plan period.

The range and extent of measures to provide housing for those unable to access housing from their own resources have been improved and extended significantly by this Government. For example, the Government provided for an increase of 60% in Exchequer expenditure on local authority and social housing programmes this year compared with last year. This is by any standards a remarkable level of increase and ensures that there is no financial constraint on the delivery of the social housing programmes. The 133% increase in Exchequer funding for local authority and social housing programmes from what was provided in 1997 by the previous Government, which included Labour Party Ministers, clearly reflects the priority we afford to meeting social housing needs.

I have also introduced for the first time a four year multi-annual local authority housing programme for the period 2000-03. One of the main reasons for introducing such a programme was that the annual notification of starts at the beginning of each year was causing too much of a "stop-go" situation. It also resulted in a bunching of the tenders being sought at the same time late in the year. The multi-annual approach will allow for greater forward planning and efficiencies of scale in delivering the increased local authority housing targets. There will be 6,000 local authority dwellings in progress at the end of this year, the highest level in a generation.

Mr. Ryan

It was higher 14 years ago.

By November I had corrected the situation. During a previous debate, Senator Ryan complimented me on that. Of course, Senator Ryan was more independent then and did not have to toe the party line.

Mr. Ryan

The Minister of State should not provoke me.

Mr. Molloy

I have tackled the problem further since then. The levels of assistance available for the provision of voluntary housing have been increased substantially on two occasions – in November 1997 and again in October 1999 – to take account of rising construction costs and to stimulate greater activity in the voluntary housing sector. I have spent much time encouraging local authorities, local authority management and local communities to become aware and to avail of the outstanding ability of the voluntary housing organisations to undertake the building of housing schemes under the capital assistance and rental subsidy schemes. I have set high targets but I am optimistic that these will be responded to and that the voluntary housing sector will be a significant addition to the overall housing programme. For the first time assistance towards site acquisition costs by voluntary bodies has recently been introduced.

These steps have resulted in significantly increased activity at local level in the voluntary housing sector. Output is expected to reach 1,000 units this year, double the 1998 output. I assure Senators that the level of assistance to the voluntary housing sector will be kept under review on an ongoing basis by the Government to ensure steady growth in output. I made that commitment at the beginning and I have reviewed it twice since then. I have also introduced the housing subsidy. All these measures are helping greatly. The provision in the Planning and Development Act to set aside 20% of housing development for social housing will be a major help to voluntary organisations in acquiring land on which to build.

Further steps to facilitate the growth of the sector include the establishment within my Department of a dedicated unit with responsibility for all aspects of voluntary housing and a remit to expand and develop the sector. A working group on voluntary housing has also been established to identify and advise on changes to procedures and schemes governing the sector. It is also mandated to advise on ways of further expanding the sector and increasing output. The group consists of representatives of the voluntary and co-operative housing movement, local authority officials and Department officials.

The Government is fully committed to tackling the problem of homelessness. We have launched an integrated strategy which offers a whole new approach to the way in which services for the homeless are to be planned, funded and provided. We have introduced new arrangements to prevent and comprehensively address the problem. The strategy aims to provide an integrated response from all the statutory and voluntary agencies providing services for the homeless. Under the strategy, each county and county borough is required to establish a homeless forum for the delivery of homeless services on a joint basis. It will consist of representatives from the local authorities within its area, the health board and the voluntary bodies operating in the county. The homeless fora will bring local authorities and health boards together to front the leadership of all responses to homelessness in their areas. I am confident that the direct involvement of local authorities and health boards in a more collaborative manner will strengthen the response of voluntary bodies to homelessness and will secure the appropriate responses which voluntary bodies have identified as not being made or deficient at present. This will overcome the major obstacle of deciding who is responsible for various aspects of the problem, to which Senator Ryan referred.

Mr. Ryan

It will solve the problem if local authorities do it, but they are not doing so.

Mr. Molloy

The strategies have not yet been put in place. They asked for an extension. All the major boroughs have prepared their strategies.

Mr. Ryan

In Cork they did not bother to consult anybody.

Mr. Molloy

Once the strategies are prepared they will be implemented. The resources are available to implement them.

Local authorities are also required to draw up action plans at city and county level in conjunction with health boards and voluntary bodies to detail how accommodation, health, settlement and welfare services will be provided for homeless persons by all the agencies involved in providing these services. The immediate task for local authorities is to lead in drawing up these action plans to deliver services to address accommodation and care needs, health and welfare needs, settlement and training in life skills. Work is well under way on action plans in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway where the greatest levels of homelessness exist and these plans should be agreed by the end of November. However, all authorities have responsibility in this matter. We have also made substantial current and capital funding available to ensure that the measures outlined in the strategy are implemented and effective.

All local authorities have prepared and adopted five year Traveller accommodation programmes, as required by the Housing (Traveller Accommodation) Act, 1998. We are committed to supporting and resourcing local authorities to allow them to implement their accommodation programmes in the period 2000-04. The national Traveller accommodation consultative committee is evaluating the adequacy and implementation of accommodation programmes and I expect its initial examination and report will be completed early in 2001. The Traveller community is strongly represented on the consultative committee and I look forward to receiving its views on the accommodation programmes which have been received from the various local authorities.

My target is to expand overall housing output through the range of local authority and voluntary housing programmes to meet the needs of more than 15,000 households over the next few years, compared to 9,200 households last year.

The Government has also significantly developed the range of schemes providing targeted assistance to improve the living conditions of those most vulnerable and those with special needs. We have increased the effective maximum disabled person's grant from £8,000 to £14,000 and allowed 90% of the cost to be recouped as opposed to the two thirds of cost grant we inherited. We have increased the effective maximum essential repairs grant from £1,800 to £6,000 and extended the scheme to urban areas. Funding for the task force on special housing aid for the elderly has been increased to record levels, from £4 million in 1997 to £8 million in 2000.

The Government also aims to develop a thriving, diverse and well-managed private rented sector. In addition to measures designed to increase the overall supply of housing, actions taken in recent years include specific incentives for the provision of rented residential accommodation in urban renewal areas and for the provision of student accommodation. In relation to income tax relief in respect of rent paid by tenants in the private rented residential sector, the Government increased the ceiling for persons under 55 years by 50% and doubled the ceiling for those over 55 years.

I also established a commission on the private rented residential sector to make recommendations on a wide range of issues, including improved security of tenure, maintaining a fair and reasonable balance between the respective rights and obligations of tenants and landlords and increasing investment in and the supply of accommodation in the sector. The report of the commission, published in July this year, identified a growing need for accommodation in the private rented sector and set out a number of recommendations to increase supply, including recommendations aimed at increasing long-term investment in private rented accommodation. The commission's recommendations must be viewed as a total package, all the constituent elements of which are essential to the successful reform of the sector. These recommendations have very significant implications for the landlord and tenant legislative code and the tax code, which are currently being examined.

The commission has identified areas where changes can be made leading to a rented sector which provides an excellent service for tenants and an appropriate return to landlords. The objective is to enable the sector develop to its maximum potential so that it may be seen as a tenure of choice, along with social housing or home ownership. I intend to submit comprehensive proposals to Government in response to the report as soon as possible – I hope to bring a memorandum, including the final recommendations, to Government within the next two weeks.

On the question of rent assistance for private rental accommodation, the Government decided in principle to establish a new local authority rent assistance scheme in accordance with the main recommendations in an interdepartmental report published last year. This would replace, in the main, the current arrangements for rent supplementation under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.

A planning group, under the aegis of my Department, which commenced work in April will report towards the end of this year with detailed proposals on rental assistance to enable the Government to take definitive decisions on future arrangements. It will also address a range of issues arising in the implementation of new arrangements and examine the possible scope for improvements in relation to the existing SWA scheme pending the introduction of new arrangements. Some improvements to the existing scheme were introduced in this year's budget and the Social Welfare Act, particularly in relation to arrangements for retention of supplements by people making the transition from welfare to work.

The key aims in relation to the rent assisted housing sector are to achieve greater effectiveness in meeting housing needs, maximum co-ordination of housing policy and effective arrangements to ensure that needs are met. This will include retention of a welfare safety net for urgent income support needs while avoiding, as far as possible, factors which could promote further imbalance between supply and demand in the private rental sector.

However, I wish to make it clear that we have no intention of repeating the mistakes made in the UK where the introduction of a housing benefit system in the 1980s contributed to the creation of a high rent and chronic dependency environment. Many tenants there are caught in a benefit trap. They cannot afford to leave the system and there is a major disincentive to improve their earnings.

Introducing an expanded system of benefits or any other device that would inject more money into the market is not the answer. It would be counter-productive in a situation where there is already an imbalance between supply of and demand for private rental accommodation. As is the case in the housing sector generally, it is important to focus on the supply side and this is a key consideration of the planning group.

One of the important issues we are exploring is the potential for more supply focused approaches to rental assistance, including possible arrangements and measures needed to promote improvements in standards and supply of rent-assisted accommodation. The objective will not be simply to transfer what is largely a welfare payment scheme to local authorities or to create an expensive, bureaucratic and counter-productive system of housing benefit.

We are committed to consulting widely and availing of all informed opinion and advice in the housing area. This is demonstrated by the establishment of the housing forum under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. The forum is not only a mechanism for the social partners to monitor, on a regular basis, implementation of the various actions set out in the PPF, but it also provides a formal avenue for input of ideas from them for future policy development.

The social partners, through their membership of the housing forum, can play an important role in assisting in tackling constraints on housing supply. For example, the trade unions and the Construction Industry Federation are well placed to assist in devising measures to address skills shortages in the construction sector. They will also be able to identify any additional constraints as they emerge. Such co-operation between the social partners and the Government is an important element in achieving the housing targets set out in the national development plan and the PPF.

The Government has prioritised the development of a modern, efficient and effective planning system. Significant advances are being made in achieving a balanced distribution of population and economic activity in the future through strategic and spatial planning. We are preparing a national spatial development strategy which will identify broad spatial development patterns for areas and will attempt to deliver more balanced development between and within regions. Strategic planning guidelines have been published and they form the basis of a development strategy for the overall Dublin and mid-east area.

The Planning and Development Act, 2000, has extended and updated the planning code and represents a fundamental development in planning law. PartV, which commenced last week, requires local authorities to prepare housing strategies to address the housing needs of all sectors of the community, including those in need of social and affordable housing. This requires local authorities to make an assessment of current and projected needs for housing in their areas, to prepare housing strategies accordingly and to vary their development plans to incorporate the strategies.

Guidelines for planning authorities on the preparation of their housing strategies, together with a model housing strategy, are being finalised by my Department and will be published later this month. This comprehensive, tiered planning structure within a national framework, which also allows for local flexibility, will allow the properly planned construction of over 500,000 additional housing units which we estimate will be required to meet housing demand over the next ten years.

The national development plan published last November provides for massively increased investment in economic infrastructure such as roads, water, sewerage and public transport, all of which is essential to support housing development in the period to 2006 and beyond. State investment in water, sewerage, roads and other services, required to open up building land for development, has never before been increased as substantially as it has been by this Government since it took office. For example, funding for water and sewerage services has increased from £163 million in 1997 to almost £290 million this year, an increase of 78%.

Good progress is being made under the serviced land initiative and output under the initiative is expected to yield 129,000 sites, well in excess of the 100,000 units originally envisaged. By the end of this year, schemes providing 100,000 sites nationally will either be completed or under construction. Key infrastructural projects such as the Swords treatment works and the north fringe sewer, both of which are critical to the development of the north Dublin area, are progressing well.

What really matters is action to deliver the increased housing our population needs. The Government has delivered and will continue to do so. The degree to which this Government's investment in housing and related infrastructure is yielding positive results in a period of extraordinary and unprecedented growth in housing demand should not be underestimated.

The Government's response to overall housing needs forms a coherent, interconnected and strategic response. I outlined some of the range of actions being taken by the Government across the housing spectrum. The actions taken by the Government will, I am sure, result in further moderation of house price increases, increased and more effective provision of social and affordable housing and the establishment of a pattern of balanced growth.

In considering the progress that has been made on housing, it is also necessary to point out that many measures already taken have yet to have full effect. This is a crucial point – there is a significant lead-in time to achieving results where construction is concerned, especially large-scale construction such as water and sewerage schemes and other infrastructural projects and when the construction industry is operating at full capacity.

Similarly, institutional change cannot deliver results overnight. The effects of our landmark policy under the Planning and Development Act to enable local authorities to reserve up to 20% of land intended for residential development for social and affordable housing have yet to be felt. All that has yet to feed into the system. The same goes for the Act's provisions which streamline the planning process. These include the use of the strategic development zones to ensure the early development of large-scale residential developments with a land holding levy for landowners who do not develop the land within a specified timeframe.

These options stared the Labour Party in the face for the five years it was in government but it did not take any initiative in this area. Senator Ryan and I sat on the Oireachtas committee which dealt with the price of building land for more than a year.

Mr. Ryan

It is only a smokescreen.

Mr. Molloy

I took over chairmanship of that committee from the leader of the party he has since joined. His leader could have done something because he was Minister for Finance.

While I acknowledge that problems and challenges exist, the Government has taken steps to address them and the effects are beginning to become apparent. Our approach to housing has been action oriented. We have kept housing under careful and ongoing analysis and review and we have refined our strategies as necessary. Any comprehensive and fair-minded analysis of the Government's record on housing will find that we have taken an unprecedented range of actions across the broad housing spectrum. It will also find that we have not been lacking in political resolve to tackle the housing issue.

I reject Senator O'Meara's false statement at the outset of her contribution. It is unworthy of her and it does not reflect the facts or what I have outlined in my speech to the House tonight.

Ms O'Meara

It is not unworthy.

Mr. Molloy

It is biased and politically inspired rhetoric which bears no relationship to the truth and the facts. The statistics will prove the Senator's comments are absolutely and utterly wrong.

The Government will continue to evaluate carefully the initiatives we have already introduced. We will implement further measures if and when we feel they are warranted. This is an ongoing situation which we will keep under review. We are not standing back from taking further major initiatives in this area to ensure our objective that every person who is urgently in need of accommodation shall get it within a reasonable period of time.

Mr. Coogan

I am sure the Minister of State remembers the expression that a rising tide lifts all ships, which was said by a person he admires, Seán Lemass. However, many of the ships are anchored on short chains and they have become submerged because the tide has never risen so fast economically. I do not have the same experience Senator Ryan has gained with the Simon Community over many years. I bow to his knowledge and genuine concern for the homeless. That issue was not addressed here tonight.

One of the side effects of rising house prices which is not always obvious is the continuation of urban sprawl. The Minister of State said he was against urban sprawl and that he wanted more concentration. However, if someone in Dublin wants to buy a house, the cheapest house they can find and afford, even with two incomes, might be as far away as north Meath or Westmeath.

Mr. Molloy

I was referring to social mix, not to urban sprawl.

Mr. Coogan

This puts a further strain on our infrastructure. It also means that travelling times are increased and carbon-dioxide gas is emitted into the air.

Although the Minister of State has established a commission for the private rented sector, it is only in response to the fact that some of the strategies he has implemented will reduce the amount of private rented accommodation because it will not be feasible or profitable for people to get involved in that area. I know student hostels are being built in some places. However, many single people, who are not students and are trying to live in Dublin or a large urban area, find there is no accommodation available or it is too costly.

Many of the initiatives the Minister of State said he has implemented are long-term. We must address this issue today. It has taken too long to come to this stage. Some 20% of social and local authority housing will now be taken from developers. I discussed this issue when we debated the Planning and Development Act, 2000, because I did not believe it was equitable. I was surprised when I discovered the decision to challenge it was overturned. Perhaps we will see some benefit from it in the future.

We have had this debate in the House a number of times because people are concerned about what is happening. This is approximately the fifth time in the past two years the Minister of State has been in the House. I accept he is committed to reducing this problem. He believes the demand and supply ends of the market must meet. Some of the strategies which have been implemented are long-term ones.

The NESF held a plenary session in Dublin Castle on 20 June and it made recommendations which are worth considering. The plenary session which was chaired by Maureen Gaffney and David Silke, who are both on the project team of the NESF, drew conclusions which might be worth remembering. It proposed the establishment of a national housing authority. The Department was reluctant to take this on board on the basis that it was a duplication of effort and a waste of money. However, the Department now appears to have come around to the idea of accepting the possibility of establishing such an authority. If that authority is established, some of the recommendations of the NESF should be considered.

Some of the recommendations of the NESF were planning and keeping under review a multiannual plan for social housing need; evaluating and co-ordinating an examination of policy issues across all housing tenders; advising on the allocation of funding to local authorities and non-profit housing organisations; providing technical advice and support for local authorities and voluntary housing bodies; facilitating the development of best practice in relation to social housing, provision and maintenance; promoting housing choice through sustainable house ownership and a diverse and well managed private rented sector; promoting social integration; supporting and co-ordinating programmes to improve housing conditions; promoting energy efficiency; undertaking and commissioning house research and evaluation; and developing a housing information service.

The Minister of State will probably say that some of those recommendations are already in place in the Department and I accept that. However, they are worthwhile. As regards the recommendation about promoting energy efficiency, I was at the Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government today which met the Construction Industry Federation. It and the people who are developing timber frame buildings discussed energy efficiency in the future.

The proposed housing programme means that half a million houses will be built in ten years. However, the planning regulations on the reduction in COf8>2 gases will not be fully implemented until 2005, which will bring the level to the German standard. That is the commitment we made at Kyoto. However, another regulation, which is not as stringent, will come into effect in 2002. The delegation at the committee meeting was asked if it would have any difficulty implementing the regulations, which are supposed to come into effect in 2005, now. An accusation was made that the Department was reluctant to introduce these regulations because it would affect the industry by increasing costs. However, the delegation stated it would not have any difficulty if the regulations were introduced sooner. I ask the Minister to take this issue on board.

Some of the restrictions attaching to the shared ownership and the affordable housing schemes run by the Department of the Environment and Local Government should be lifted. It should be left to the local authorities to decide where greater proportionality may be more appropriate. That might create a better social mix.

The Minister of State said that a certain number of local authority houses must be developed. Local authorities should have more flexibility to decide whether they want more social housing and a better mix. Our local authority held a debate recently where the acting city manager was very reluctant to accept our recommendation regarding more social housing in a specific area on the Headford Road. We are in favour of the concept of social housing, which will lead to more private ownership.

I accept the Government's holistic approach to the homeless. I ask the Minister of State to take on board recommendations made by Padraic Kenna, a director of the Galway Simon Community, who believes that some anomalies can be addressed and he asks if it could be Government policy to accidentally exclude many of the minority groups dealing with homeless people from local homelessness fora. He also asks if there is a need to complement the administrative response to the homeless, An Integrated Strategy Report, with a chapter of rights for the service users. Would a right to adequate and affordable housing for all citizens, including children, empower those who are excluded from housing far better than any other approach? I ask the Minister to take those points on board.

Mr. Walsh

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

"Seanad Éireann welcomes the progress achieved by the Government in the housing area, including in particular:

the measures taken to:

–increase housing supply, including the introduction of the serviced land initiative which will yield over 129,000 sites for housing;

–moderate house price increases;

–address social and affordable housing need;

–improve the delivery of housing related infrastructure;

–record housing output in each successive year since coming into office;

–the introduction for the first time of an expanded multi-annual local authority housing programme;

–the range of measures taken to expand the output and capacity of the voluntary housing sector;

–the range of measures taken to address homelessness, including substantially increased resources, additional accommodation, improved inter-agency co-operation and the introduction of a comprehensive integrated strategy to meet the needs of homeless persons;

–the enactment of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 and, in particular, the provisions of Part V dealing with housing strategies and the provision of social and affordable housing;

–the provision in Action on Housing of an additional £1 billion over and above the £6 billion allocated in the National Development Plan, 2000-06 for social and affordable housing."

This country has a proud record of home ownership and I am convinced that will continue. The Government's record on housing is unparalleled. Many new and innovative measures have been introduced in recent years. The Minister of State alluded to many of them in his speech.

To refer to the challenges in this area as amounting to a housing crisis is an exaggeration. It would be a pity to politicise what is a very important social remit of the Government and the Houses of the Oireachtas to ensure we meet the challenges ahead. Certain problems have arisen, for example, the escalation of house prices has affected accessibility and the homelessness problem continues, especially in the major population centres in the cities.

The escalating price of houses is a consequence of the imbalance that has arisen in supply and demand. The Government has rightly tackled this issue. Measures taken prior and subsequent to the Bacon reports have been partially successful, but the problem is not yet resolved. The measures outlined by the Minster of State include the strategic development zones where areas have been designated for large-scale residential development. The landholding tax penalises landowners who do not develop their land within a specified timeframe. Those are positive developments towards generating an increase in the supply of housing.

The project offices, referred to by the Minister of State, will drive key infrastructural projects. Other supply side developments include addressing the shortages in the capacity of the building and construction industry, especially in the areas of skilled and professional workers and the employment of existing planning resources, an issue that was debated in the House previously.

On the demand side, the reductions in stamp duty have encouraged and facilitated first-time buyers to purchase second-hand houses. The corollary of that is the 9% stamp duty applied to investors in the private sector. That has impacted significantly on demand and has created a better balance.

The various social and affordable housing measures that have been taken are commendable. The Minister of State outlined the additional 1,000 local authority houses per annum for the years 2000-06. The shared ownership scheme could be more widely promoted by local government and the local authorities. Increasing income eligibility to £25,000 for single people, with a corresponding increase for double income families, will assist the promotion of that scheme. The increase in the local authority house purchase loan to £100,000 is a recognition of the reality of house prices.

The investment of £600 million in housing this year, an increase of 52% on 1999, is unprecedented. In 1999, 46,500 houses were constructed and on the basis of figures for the first nine months of this year that figure is expected to be in excess of 50,000. All these figures are very significant increases on the position when the Minister took office.

The increase in new house prices for the first nine months of this year is 7%. That is still too high, being in excess of inflation. There is a need to continue to drive down this figure. In this regard, the profits in the construction industry should be targeted.

The total provision for local authority housing is £434 million this year, an increase of over 140% on 1997, the last year the Labour Party was in power. A sum of £65 million was provided for the voluntary housing scheme. Part V of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, which was welcomed by all sides of the House, includes a courageous and republican initiative which has proved to be very unpopular with developers. We have yet to see the benefit of it, but it is good that it has been enacted. I hope it will be energetically pursued.

The personal and social costs of homelessness are enormous. The break up of the family unit is enough in itself, but the subsequent consequences of loss of identity, social alienation and the loss of opportunity are additional features which add to the devastation associated with homelessness. We must solve the problem, especially when funding is available. There appears to be a far greater focus on the problem than heretofore.

A radio programme broadcast a few days ago identified 800 hospital bed places available in Dublin. There is approximately 95% occupancy. I am sure the Minister of State will clarify that these places are allocated to people aged over 25 years and that there are only 50 bed places for those aged under 25 years. There is a particular problem with young people who find themselves homeless. The housing situation is not the only cause. The problem needs to be tackled on a wider basis.

The various voluntary organisations involved in homelessness should be complimented. We are fortunate that over a wider sphere of activities, be it sport or social services, there are people who give selflessly of their time in the interests of others. We should commend the Simon Community, Focus Ireland and others who play a positive and constructive role in this area.

I strongly support the Minister of State's efforts to address homelessness. People are entitled to two basic rights, the right to work and a job opportunity and the right to shelter. Following that, a good republican philosophy would allow people to develop their talents and progress from there. The State has a duty in both of these areas. We have been very successful in tackling the employment issue, especially over the past five or six years. We can now make a serious attempt to address the problem of homelessness.

It is important to consider the causes of homelessness. These include poverty, unemployment, various health issues, including mental health, alcoholism, drug addiction, lack of appropriate services, relationship breakdown, family violence, sexual abuse and parenting deficiencies. All of these problems are factors which give rise to homelessness in many instances and it is imperative, therefore, that this question is tackled not just by the Department and local authorities in providing accommodation but in a more integrated way. The manner in which the Minister has set out his integrated strategy, which I believe will bear fruit, is a welcome step in this regard.

I would like briefly to mention another area, namely, the availability of private rented accommodation for single people. We have a generous rental subsidy system in operation and there is talk of bringing that under the remit of local government, something which is long overdue, but we should also ensure that local authorities implement the registration of rented dwellings. If the availability of rented accommodation under local government could be combined with this new strategy, we could have an effective mechanism for making serious inroads into the homelessness problem.

Mr. Norris

This is an important motion and it is useful that the House should discuss it. It is a pity, however, if we see it entirely in a partisan, adversarial way where we have, on the one hand, accusations and condemnation of the Government and, on the other, lists of statistics, the achievements of the Government and so on. It is easy for either side to justify its own position but at the heart of this matter, as speakers from both sides of the House have indicated, there is a real human problem.

For that reason I am glad that my colleague, Senator Coogan, put on the record some of the information contained in the report of the NESF. I will not go back over that because he appropriately put down the bullet points contained in the document circulated to us. The NESF made a telling point when it stated that access to adequate housing shelter represents one of the most basic needs and should be regarded as a fundamental human and social right. It argued that individuals, families, communities and economies cannot be sustained without adequate accommodation. It went on to suggest that serious problems remain and to acknowledge that there was a 43% increase in the official assessment of housing need between 1996 and 1999, and that social housing output over the period was unacceptably low. That is not a particularly partisan point. That does not come from one political party; it comes from an agency that deals with these people on the ground, and it specifies both the public and voluntary sectors. That is where we need to target our comments and it is certainly where I intend to locate my concerns.

We are aware on a human basis of precisely how significant to us as creatures is the provision of adequate housing. One only has to look at the past few days when we were hit by floods, and the shock registered in the faces of people in comfortable homes who suddenly found themselves without a home. Those people have all the advantages of wealth and suddenly a natural catastrophe strikes and they are confronted with a situation they never expected. As we have seen in recent days, that can happen to almost everyone.

There is no question that there has been an enormous escalation of house prices. I know this from my personal experience. I am one of the lucky ones and it is necessary for those of us who have advantages to understand that there are many other people in our society who do not have these advantages. Twenty-five years ago I bought a house in Dublin with 25 rooms for £25,000. Within the past six months, the mews that had originally been attached to the house, in other words, the garage, as we would say today, was withdrawn at £250,000. Every week in the property supplements we see Europe-wide comparisons. One can buy a villa in Greece for a quarter of the price of a suburban house in Dublin. That is not the responsibility of one Government. It is partly market forces and it would be unfair of me to blame this particular Minister for that, but that is a fact that we have to take into account, even for professional, middle class people.

At one point in my career I was an academic of sorts and I still maintain some contact with the world of academia. I find it interesting that a number of recent appointments in our universities have got into difficulty because people at a fairly senior level in academic life find that they cannot afford housing in Dublin on their salaries. That is an interesting point. If it bites at that level, what must it be like lower down the scale? We need somebody with the passion of Noel Browne to release funding for the people who are at the most difficult point in the housing scale, and there are many of them. Sometimes it is difficult for us to see them.

I know this motion is in the name of the Labour Party, and that does not entirely surprise me because it is known to have a social concern. Senator Ryan spoke earlier, and I regret I was not in the House to hear him, but ten years ago when our offices were across the road in Kildare House it was a standing reproach to us as parliamentarians that every time we moved in and out of that building to come across here to speak or to vote, we passed a woman who was living in a cardboard box. We made some attempt to help her but the difficulty was that I believe she had some kind of personality problem.

We heard some well intentioned words from the Minister. He said that this evening's debate is all about building houses and that the local authorities could build the whole four year programme in one year. That may be true. He went on to say that it was all about building houses on the ground, not about making speeches but one also has to understand the psychology of the people who are homeless. It is not just a question of creating concrete flats on the ground. It is trying to understand the reason there are still people who are homeless. I am glad tribute was paid to the extraordinary and valiant work of Sr. Stanislaus Kennedy, but why is she still needed if the situation is so easily resolved by the simple building of houses, as the Minister said?

I am familiar with the inner city of Dublin. I sometimes take shortcuts through its back streets and on an afternoon a couple of months ago, about 5.30 p.m. or 6 p.m., I walked through Henry Place, at the back of O'Connell Street, the principal thoroughfare of this capital city, and I saw a young man with no shoes on his feet eating food out of a skip. That young man's problems will not be solved simply by building houses. There has to be a greater imaginative effort on our part, and that is the way we must proceed.

Other people mentioned the drugs problem. I am glad Senator Walsh mentioned the difficulties for young single people because where local authorities have a points system, single people are considerably disadvantaged.

I ask the Minister to consider a situation that was drawn to my attention by a correspondent who both wrote to me and telephoned me. He claimed he was denied housing and told by somebody in a local authority that his application was pointless because he was gay. His feeling was not simply that, as a single man, he would not have enough points. He got the feeling from the local authority that because of his lifestyle there would be less energy put into housing him. If that is true, it is a great pity, particularly in our alleged Christian community where one of the questions one should ask is, "Who is my neighbour?"

I am sorry there is so little time and I thank the Chair for his slight indulgence. If there was one point I would like taken from my few inadequate words this evening it is that the building of houses simply as concrete shells is not enough. A piece of concrete is not a home. Ask the disadvantaged or the young homeless people we increasingly see on our streets. We must understand why they are there and do something about it.

Mr. Gibbons

I welcome the Minister of State. As Senator Coogan pointed out, this is the fifth time we have discussed this subject in recent years. There is no doubt there is a significant housing problem for which there are many varied reasons. Some of these reasons relate to more than the lack of a building, but to house people, be they underprivileged or privileged, we need and will continue to need many more houses.

One of the reasons for the housing problem is the extraordinary and unprecedented growth in demand in recent years. There may be a number of reasons for this but one significant factor has been the growth of the economy and the demand for second houses as an investment by those who already own a house. This has led to an increase in house prices which has excluded many people from the market, particularly first-time buyers.

I compliment the Minister of State on the measures he has taken. Most people agree he has a detailed understanding of the problem and is very committed to finding a solution. We have to achieve a balance between the supply and demand for housing as, only then, will we curtail the increase in the cost of housing.

We must also think in terms of what has been done in recent years. The Action on Housing programme, introduced last June, allocated an additional £1 billion for housing over and above the £6 billion provided in the national development plan. Everyone will agree that the measures being introduced are being pursued with great urgency.

The Minister of State referred to the difficulty caused by lead-in times. No matter what measures one introduces to provide additional housing one has to obtain and service a site and build the house before one can move in, all of which takes time.

There is no doubt that every effort is being made to bring forward land for housing more quickly than in the past. However, local authorities are experiencing problems due to the lack of planning staff and the fact that they are losing planning officers to the private sector. It is proving quite difficult to replace these people. Measures were introduced last June to alleviate some of these bottlenecks and there are other difficulties as regards infrastructure. These measures are beginning to take effect and there has been a significant increase in investment in the voluntary, social and private housing sectors.

The most recent changes in stamp duty have led to a situation where first time buyers and owner occupiers are in a much stronger position than in the past as investors who buy two, three, four and five houses as a capital base will be discouraged from doing so in the future. I know of one individual who bought ten houses on an estate in Carlow. The changes in stamp duty will mean that more houses will be available for first time buyers and this is to be welcomed.

These measures are beginning to bring about a moderation in the cost of housing. This is particularly the case with new houses where the rate of increase is reaching a more manageable level than in recent years. This is to be welcomed. We all know of young couples earning good salaries who want to get a foothold on the housing ladder but are unable to do so. Such people saw the cost of housing continuing to rise, but I hope that is coming to an end. This offers the possibility that people may be able to buy a house in 12 months or when they have a deposit. Twelve months to two years ago, such people had no possibility of getting on the ladder. This is one of the positive outcomes of the measures introduced.

It is vital that we increase the supply of housing. The Minister of State outlined that, over the next ten years, there will be a need for about 500,000 additional houses. That is an extraordinary number of houses in a country of this size so it is imperative that land is rezoned quickly. I am aware of many cases at local authority level where the Labour Party, the sponsor of this motion, has prevented rezoning. In some cases there were valid reasons for stopping the rezoning but in many other cases the reasons were spurious. This is not good enough as we need to fast-track this process.

We also need to put in place the necessary infrastructure as quickly as possible and, thankfully, the Government has allocated money to this area. The Minister of State pointed out that, over the past three years, investment in infrastructure has increased by about 80%. We will have to live with the problem of the lead-in times. It takes time to achieve things and one cannot build a house over night. I once saw a factory where people were laying, plastering and painting blocks on the same day, in the rain, in preparation for an official opening. That does not work.

Another problem is that the construction industry is operating at full capacity. Whatever measures are needed to increase this capacity must be taken. The number of people involved in construction is increasing every year but we will have to continue this increase as much as possible in the coming years.

Dr. Henry

I am sure the House is fed up with me talking about the homeless people I meet on Baggot Street on my way home every night. I recommend that Senators read the very good report on homelessness in Dublin issued by the Office for Health Gain which points out that a considerable number of those on the streets are ill and will never be able to buy one of the houses being built. None of these people will ever be able to run their own home unless effort is put into the other areas which are contributing to homelessness.

The report points out that, in general, homeless people who sleep out in this city are older men, women with children, young males and refugees. The refugee crisis has been tackled to some extent and women in general are accommodated with their children in bed and breakfasts, but they are out on the street during the day. However, the situation for adult males and young men, many of whom have left home because of disagreement with the family, is really very serious. When one reads this report, which states that 30% of them have psychiatric illness, and one remembers that 1% of the general population have psychiatric illness, one really sees how appalling the situation is.

Earlier this year Professor Ted Dinan of the Royal College of Surgeons spoke of the services in the area of the Eastern Health Board, which is now the Eastern Regional Health Authority, as being substandard, the out-patient facilities in particular. We have a situation where we have put community facilities in some locations and while the buildings may look fine they are totally underfunded and, therefore, are not staffed adequately. People who require psychotherapy, occupational therapy or the support of social workers can get nothing except drugs given out by the doctors and nurses working there because the sector is totally underfunded.

Twenty years ago the paper The Psychiatric Service: Planning for the Future encouraged the closure of the major psychiatric institutions and that people would be cared for in the community. We closed the psychiatric institutions and put people out of major hospitals but we have not provided the community care to support these people. The process has slowed down a little now because the situation has been seen to be so appalling and the services are out in the community and trying to treat homeless psychiatric patients which is almost impossible. I am not talking about the additional people who have alcohol and drug abuse problems – they form about another 20%. About 50% of the people who are out there tonight are actually ill and in need of services which are not being provided. It is very difficult to ensure that homeless people will take their medication. To try to get them to go to day hospitals, which were so uninviting and so deficient in staff, only compounds the problem.

Another serious disincentive to homeless people getting treatment is the sectorisation policy which we have pursued in the psychiatric services. This means that if one meets somebody outside Baggot Street hospital and asks where he comes from and he says "Blanchardstown", one cannot get him treatment in this area because they will say that he must go to his own sector, to Blanchardstown. If, however, he fell down and broke his leg he would not have to go out to Blan chardstown and he could go to St. Vincent's Hospital. Therefore, there is total discrimination against people with psychiatric illness just from the point of view of getting the bare necessities of the health service.

It is important to remember also that 10% of schizophrenics die young, that is, under 30. When one thinks of the number of these homeless people who may be schizophrenic and not getting proper treatment and when one thinks of the treatment for schizophrenia available nowadays and the fact that they might be well able, if given proper treatment, to hold down jobs, it really is deplorable the way we have let so many people end up in this outrageous position due to the fact that they are homeless because they have psychiatric illness. Some people with alcohol and drug problems end up out on the street supporting their habit through prostitution and that is another problem we must deal with.

Another group who are heavily represented among the homeless are people who were in prison. There is little in the way of discharge facilities when people leave prison. Some of them have ended up in prison because of their vagrant lifestyle and being involved in minor offences but they should not have been put in prison in the first place. Somewhere to live should have been found for them. If they had been involved with the probation services, social workers, etc., perhaps one would not have them costing us £50,000 a year to be kept in Mountjoy. It really is ridiculous. When one thinks that Sister Caoimhín does not even get £50,000 a year to run her drop-in centre and here we have £50,000 being spent on prisoners, it really makes me so angry.

On discharge, most prisoners, if they cannot get into a Simon hostel or one of the Salvation Army hostels, really are lost. Focus Point does a great deal for young people who may be in a position where they cannot stay at home, but how many emergency beds are there for young single people in this city at present? I think there are 50. This is ridiculous. We need several hundred. An effort in this area will help us to save money in the long-run by not having to care for these people in the prison service.

Children also pose a serious problem because some of them leave home due to abuse or neglect and, because of the Child Care Act, 1991, they are in the care of the health boards. The health board, however, describes these children not as homeless but as "out of home" because there is somewhere, they say, which they could stay if only they would go back there, but maybe they have extraordinarily good reasons for not going back to their homes. There is little investigation into the reasons the children have left home in the first place.

I ask the Minister to have the situation regarding hostels addressed, not just in the centre of Dublin but all over the country, to see if we could have a better support service with hostels for emergency care for children and young people in particular.

Much of the emergency accommodation is in fact not emergency accommodation anymore. It must be used on a long-term basis by people who have nowhere else to go and some of them do need support. Streetwise and Barnardos do a great deal with children and I cannot speak highly enough of organisations like the Salvation Army, Focus Point, the Simon Community and the Capuchin drop-in centre on the quays. Those in the voluntary sector make such a huge effort that we in the State sector need to focus our minds far more on the multiple causes, which are not bricks and mortar and which result in so many people living on the streets of Dublin.

Mr. D. Kiely

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome this debate. No doubt there are homeless people in Ireland but there are homeless people in every country and one would not want to forget that. As a matter of fact, I was part of a group in my county, County Kerry, some years ago where we tracked down homeless people in London and went to the trouble of bringing them back home under the voluntary/community housing programme, which was initiated by this Government. Such projects are welcome.

However, I am amazed at the escalation in house prices over the past number of years. In the early 1960s one could buy a house in Ireland for £600, £700 or £800 but now they are enormously expensive. There are reasons for that and they have been tackled. This Government has taken on the challenge and it is tackling the problem in a very real way. I congratulate the Government for making funding of the order of £6 billion available for the first time over the term of the national development plan. Recently it announced the provision of an extra £1 billion for that programme and increasing the number of houses in the programme by 1,000.

Last year over 50,000 houses were built in Ireland. If that rate continues over the next ten years, an extra 500,000 houses will be built. A comparison worth noting here is that in a country with a population of four million, we will build half a million houses over the next ten years yet the UK, which has a population of 60 million, is building about 160,000 per annum. We are building 50,000 per annum with a population of four million. That means the rate of construction of new homes here is approximately 450% greater than that of the UK. One would want to examine the reason that is happening. The reason is that the economy of this country has turned around completely. I remember in 1987, when Fianna Fáil took power after a Fine Gael-Labour coalition Government from 1983-87, every newspaper and commentator said they thought everyone would leave the country and they asked the last person leaving to make sure they turned out the lights. Over a 13 years period, the entire economy has been transformed. One would have to ask how this came about. Was it an accident or was it as a result of proper management by good Governments?

There is a problem now. There are homeless people and people seeking to be housed. I remember a time when one would not get a local authority house unless one was married, had been on the housing list for three, four or five years, had maybe three or four children and lived in a mobile home or in poor accommodation, but all that has changed. I remember when I was first elected to the local authority in County Kerry in the 1980s, there were approximately 1,400 people on the housing list. The Government transformed the situation and brought that list down to about 400 people. The list has gone up to 700 or 800 people but it is a long way short of the 1,400 people who were on the housing list then.

For the first time we are housing unmarried mothers, single parents and old people. That did not happen under any other Government. There was no such thing as 90% funding for community housing efforts. No effort was made. It was a case of whether we were going to build 50 or 60 houses per local authority or whether there might be 90 starts one year, which would be finished in two or three years time. All of a sudden a programme has been put in place by a Government which wants to ensure the housing needs of this country are addressed.

Other steps could be taken to improve the housing situation. Many fat cats came in and bought up a lot of land. Somebody mentioned the rezoning of land. Rezoning seems to be a terrible word in Dublin and in other big cities where it was thought that if the Government or a local authority rezoned land, it was for gain and so on. I have stated on many occasions that a lot more land needs to be rezoned. The Government is making funding available for infrastructure, including roads, water and sewerage. It is making the moneys available under the national plan and a lot more land should be rezoned.

The local authorities, which have land banks at their disposal, should make land available for people who are on the housing list at an affordable price, not at £20,000 to £80,000 per site. The local authority should offer sites to people who are on the housing list at knock down prices of maybe £400 or £500 per site to entice these people to build their own homes rather than go on a waiting list and wait for the Government to build houses for them in the future.

There is plenty of work available at the moment, thanks to the Government, and everybody is making a good living. I admit there will always be a certain number of homeless people but that is the case all over the world. People fall on hard times for one reason or other and they are homeless in the short-term. The number of homeless in this country is not large compared to that in other countries. In the United States, Canada and Australia, there are homeless people. That is a reality.

The Government is tackling social housing needs with the programme introduced by the local authorities and the Southern Health Board which will house people who are old and deprived. Local authorities could play a bigger role with the land banks they have. They should buy more land at affordable prices. House prices are levelling off at the moment because, as was stated by a Senator, the number of fat cats buying eight, ten or 15 houses to try to drive up the price is on the decline. Prices will level off and people will be able to afford to buy their own houses shortly.

Mr. Caffrey

As regards Senator Kiely's analysis of the economy and how it has developed since 1987, I remind him that the 1977 manifesto removed the entire tax base. The few that were eligible to pay tax did not pay it as the tribunals are now discovering. The entire tax base was removed in the 1980s.

We have a two tier society and are trying to solve problems in Dublin which do not apply to the rest of the country. There is no homelessness in rural Ireland, but there are thousands of people on the local authority housing lists which was not the case in the 1980s. There is not the type of homelessness about which we are speaking in Dublin.

The Bacon report, in its endeavours to solve the crisis in Dublin, has affected the property market throughout rural Ireland because what pertains in Dublin does not pertain throughout the country. In County Mayo, from where I come, house prices are declining. One can get £10,000 off the list price of a house if one spends about five minutes talking to an auctioneer.

We must remember there are two different groups. We have an explosion in Dublin, with economic development and the number of people living in the capital, which is too many. We are trying to persuade them to move down the country and to get jobs there. The crisis in Dublin does not pertain down the country. As I said, the Bacon report, in its endeavour to solve this Dublin problem, is affecting house prices and property throughout the country.

The Minister will already have had representations from the House Builders Association, which has recently formed a new association in Connacht-Ulster to try to bring some sanity back to the market. Second homes, especially holiday homes in Counties Donegal and Mayo, cannot be sold at present because investors have left the market. The Government needs to monitor the situation. By solving the crisis in Dublin, it is creating a crisis down the country which it will also have to solve shortly.

Ms O'Meara

I thank the Minister and Senators who contributed to this very important debate. A range of points were made to which I would like to respond, although it will not be possible to do so in five minutes. One or two, however, stand out. I have been told by Members on the other side that what we refer to as a crisis is an exaggeration. I also heard that we have a proud record of home ownership. If we have a proud record on home ownership, will the Senator agree there is a crisis when a couple on a joint income of £40,000 cannot afford to buy a House? I urge Members on the Government side to wake up to the crisis.

I also wish to comment on Senator Kiely's remarks on homelessness. He seems to be saying that this is homelessness is acceptable because every country has this problem. He implies that this is tolerable. Homelessness is not acceptable, and neither is the Senator's attitude. It is not good enough for a Senator on the Government side simply to say every country has a homelessness problem and some people will always be living on the streets. This type of attitude has led judges to take extraordinary measures to make the Government wake up to the problem of homelessness, particularly child homelessness in this city.

Mr. D. Kiely

I said there were social reasons for this.

Ms O'Meara

Rezoning, which is being investigated by tribunals, has been used to line pockets. We know the rezoning of land has made millionaires of landowners overnight. I reject totally the accusations made by the other side of the House that the Labour Party has somehow obstructed the rezoning of land for development. That is not the case. My councillor colleagues throughout the country are resisting this lining of pockets over night, which is still taking place. The housing crisis is still ongoing.

I was accused of making this a political issue. It is a political issue because political decisions have led to the current problems. I have listened to many people talk about the need for housing but I have not heard them talk about the right to housing. I heard remarks which indicated that people have a right to two houses, a right to invest, while so many are currently in need of basic shelter.

The Minister of State said that his major concern is to tackle the issue of homelessness. I accept he has a personal commitment in relation to this matter but he needs to do much more to solve the problem. He referred in his speech to a special housing aid scheme for the elderly. Housing covers a large range of issues, including availability of housing, homelessness and so on. I must bring to the Minister of State's attention a letter I received from the health board in my area in response to representations I made on behalf of an applicant for the special housing aid scheme for the elderly. The application was received in 1999 and the letter read, "We are currently dealing with applications received in 1996". There is a four year waiting period for basic assistance for the elderly, some of whom we all know are living in dire conditions. In a world class economy, this aspect of housing is a scandal and a disgrace. The Government is still in denial and fails to wake up to this crisis.

Amendment put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 27; Níl, 20.

Tá

Bohan, Eddie.
Bonner, Enda.
Callanan, Peter.
Cassidy, Donie.
Chambers, Frank.
Cregan, John
Dardis, John.
Farrell, Willie.
Fitzgerald, Liam.
Fitzgerald, Tom.
Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
Gibbons, Jim.
Glynn, Camillus.
Kett, Tony.
Kiely, Daniel.
Kiely, Rory.
Lanigan, Mick.
Leonard, Ann.
Lydon, Don.
Mooney, Paschal.
Moylan, Pat.
O'Brien, Francis.
O'Donovan, Denis.
Ó Fearghail, Seán.
Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
Ormonde, Ann.
Walsh, Jim.

Níl

Burke, Paddy.
Caffrey, Ernie.
Coghlan, Paul.
Connor, John.
Coogan, Fintan.
Costello, Joe.
Cregan, Denis (Dino).
Doyle, Joe.
Hayes, Tom.
Henry, Mary.
Jackman, Mary.
Keogh, Helen.
McDonagh, Jarlath.
Manning, Maurice.
Norris, David.
O'Meara, Kathleen.
Ridge, Thérèse.
Ross, Shane.
Ryan, Brendan.
Taylor-Quinn, Madeleine.

Tellers: Tá, Senators T. Fitzgerald and Gibbons; Níl, Senators O'Meara and Ryan.

Question declared carried.

Amendment declared carried.

Question put: “That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.”

Tá

Bohan, Eddie.Bonner, Enda.Callanan, Peter.Chambers, Frank.Cregan, JohnDardis, John.Farrell, Willie.Fitzgerald, Liam.Fitzgerald, Tom.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Gibbons, Jim.Glynn, Camillus.Kett, Tony.

Kiely, Daniel.Kiely, Rory.Lanigan, Mick.Leonard, Ann.Lydon, Don.Mooney, Paschal.Moylan, Pat.O'Brien, Francis.O'Donovan, Denis.Ó Fearghail, Seán.Ó Murchú, Labhrás.Ormonde, Ann.Walsh, Jim.

Níl

Burke, Paddy.Caffrey, Ernie.Coghlan, Paul.Connor, John.Coogan, Fintan.Costello, Joe.Cregan, Denis (Dino).Doyle, Joe.Hayes, Tom.Henry, Mary.

Jackman, Mary.Keogh, Helen.McDonagh, Jarlath.Manning, Maurice.Norris, David.O'Meara, Kathleen.Ridge, Thérèse.Ross, Shane.Ryan, Brendan.Taylor-Quinn, Madeleine.

Tellers: Tá, Senators T. Fitzgerald and Gibbons; Níl, Senators O'Meara and Ryan.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 8 Nov 2000