Priority Questions
1 Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he has undertaken a review of the commercial rate system here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30521/11]
View answerLocal authorities are under a statutory obligation to levy rates on any property used for commercial purposes in accordance with the details entered in the valuation lists prepared by the independent Commissioner of Valuation under the Valuation Act 2001. The levying and collection of rates are matters for each local authority. The annual rate on valuation applied to the valuation of each property, determined by the Valuation Office, to obtain the amount payable in rates, is decided by the elected members of each local authority in the annual budget and its determination is a reserved function of a local authority.
The Commissioner of Valuation, who has sole responsibility for all valuation matters, is conducting a programme of revaluation of all commercial and industrial properties throughout the State on a county-by-county basis. The purpose of the revaluation process is to update commercial valuations which will assist in providing a more equitable distribution of rates for those liable to pay rates. Local authorities have been asked by my Department to exercise restraint in setting the annual rate on valuation in this and previous years and they have responded positively in this regard. I recognise these are difficult economic times for many businesses. I will continue to keep all matters relating to rates under regular consideration and review and I am determined that every avenue will be pursued to optimise efficiency and contain and reduce costs in the local government sector.
It is fair to say this is one of the greatest challenges facing commercial Ireland and its small and medium sized businesses, as the Minister is aware. It is also fair to say there has been no statement of substance from the Government that has given any degree of comfort or hope to commercial ratepayers. The Minister has met the new group, Irish Employers for Affordable Rates, which held a lobby last week across the road. Such is the message they have given me.
We realise the system is complex. There are some 170,000 businesses and they pay €1.3 million in rates per annum. At the Committee of Public Accounts this morning, the Valuation Office indicated the current revaluation exercise could take more than ten years and this is of great concern. We must see a degree of action on the matter. The Irish Employers for Affordable Rates pointed out, correctly, that Colm McCarthy was able to undertake an exercise swiftly and the Minister and the Government has accepted and is implementing many of his recommendations. The McCarthy group was able to undertake an exercise that started in late 2008 and finished during the middle of 2009 with the production of a comprehensive document. As the Minister is aware, we need action on this issue.
Will the Minister not consider the United Kingdom model whereby a business's ability to pay is taken into consideration? Has consideration been given to any variation or amendment to the Valuation Act? The household charge has been debated here and the Minister has announced that it will come into effect in January. I understand it will be a self-assessment tax, like the non-principal private residence, NPPR, tax. Could we consider a system of self-assessment for businesses based on another model, one that is perhaps similar to the VAT registration model for businesses above a certain threshold? At the moment small and medium sized businesses are falling flat on their faces. This is a barrier to their survival, a point we cannot emphasise enough. The Minister, the Minister of State, Deputy Penrose, and every elected person in the House understands as much as well as everyone in the business community but nothing appears to be happening about it.
I agree totally with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Niall Collins on the small business sector. Those in the sector are under pressure from a variety of areas and the cost base of surviving in business is a legitimate concern for them. However, given that 29% of local authority income is from the commercial rate base one can understand how important a source of income it is for local authorities as well. In the past two years there has been a reduction in commercial rates of 0.64% across the 88 local authorities. This may be a small reduction but in the context of the times we are in it was important that we did not increase them. That is always the easy options for local authority members. I am pleased that my initiative in this regard has worked well with the leaders of the groups.
I met the Commissioner of Valuation recently and we considered various ways in which we could improve the revaluation process and speed it up. It is totally unacceptable that it could take ten or more years to carry out a revaluation process. Revaluation has been carried out in several local authorities in the Dublin area with mixed success. Some people believe that a revaluation process will be a winner for them but that it not always the case. There are winners and losers in this process. Nevertheless, if a revaluation process is carried out and people believe there is a fair application given the times we are in, then they should be prepared to acknowledge that. I expect the Commissioner on Valuation will come back to Government, the Minister for Finance and myself with proposals in the coming weeks. There is a valuation Bill on the A list to go through the Houses of the Oireachtas this session and that will give us an opportunity to determine what we can do to help.
2 Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to review the application criteria for local authority social housing waiting lists; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that there is an increase in social housing need during the current economic climate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30520/11]
View answerThe recently published statutory housing needs assessment showed an increase in the overall level of need to somewhat more than 98,000 households. The assessment breaks down housing need under several headings to identify those whose need arises, for example, from unsuitable existing accommodation, age or special needs resulting from physical or mental incapacity. A notable feature of the current assessment is the number of households whose identified need arises from their no longer being able to afford their own accommodation. This equates to some 67% of households in need, which is clearly a reflection of the current economic circumstances.
A new approach to assessing need is now being implemented resulting from regulations which came into effect after the current assessment was concluded. In time, this will provide a more consistent, objective and timely system for the assessment of need. This new system includes a standardised set of eligibility criteria designed to bring greater equity and transparency to the assessment process. While these new regulations are now in force it will be some time before data on housing need are accumulated under the new system of assessment. I will keep the new system under review and I will make any further adjustments required in light of experience to ensure it delivers a timely and robust assessment of need on an ongoing basis. In that regard, I have already increased the eligibility criteria in respect of income by €5,000 in each case. While this will have the effect of further increasing demand for social housing, it is beneficial in providing for a broader based and more sustainable approach to identifying and addressing social housing need.
With the indulgence of the Ceann Comhairle, the Minister of State will leave the Chamber when the reply concludes.
The Minister of State may leave now if he wishes.
I will respond to Deputy Stanley first.
I tabled this question because of the large number of people experiencing difficulty in having their names added to local authority housing waiting lists. While I accept the Minister of State's comments on the introduction of a standardised set of eligibility criteria, the new application form runs to between 16 and 18 pages and as many as 18 separate items of documentation and supporting evidence are required of applicants. This is causing significant problems. In some cases, it is easier to obtain a visa to visit Australia than to join the local authority housing waiting list.
When I raised the issue of medical evidence with the Minister of State about three months ago, he provided a helpful reply in which he stated it was not a requirement in all cases that a medical report be provided by a consultant. The local authorities continue to hold out in this regard and are demanding that a consultant's report be furnished, despite the Minister of State's clear statement that such a report is not required in all cases. There is a communications problem in this regard.
At least two local authorities have withdrawn the requirement that applicants for local authority housing have a local connection dating back five years. This clause has been questioned and challenged. What is the position in this regard?
The guidelines require that a copy of the tenancy agreement be furnished. Some local authorities also seek the landlord's Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, registration number. While Sinn Féin supports full compliance with the requirements of the PRTB, the refusal of some landlords to provide tenants with a PRTB number is creating major problems for housing applicants. In some cases, landlords who have a PRTB number are refusing to provide either a PRTB or PPS number. It is also difficult for tenants to obtain from a landlord written confirmation that rent payments are up to date. For example, landlords are reluctant to provide such confirmation in cases where the tenant pays rent one month in advance.
I ask the Minister of State to provide clarification as regards the provision of the PRTB number and the five year local residency clause. I have a copy of his previous reply on the requirement to furnish a consultant's report as medical evidence. Will local authorities be informed by circular that such evidence is no longer necessary in all cases and that, for example, an occupational therapist's report may suffice in some cases?
We are trying to introduce objective and standardised criteria. It should not be necessary to produce a consultant's report, given that it may take a long period to obtain such a report, thus prolonging the process and creating further trauma for applicants. There may also be a financial outlay required of the applicant who may not have the wherewithal to meet the cost. An ordinary general practitioner's report or, in specific circumstances, an occupational therapist's report or a combination thereof should be sufficient in the vast bulk of cases related to social housing.
I will examine the provision of having a local connection for five years, which is an extremely long period, given that, in many cases, applicants have returned to an area they left, through no fault of their own, to secure employment.
I am less sympathetic on the issue of the Private Residential Tenancies Board number. We all share the same objective in this regard and the sooner we amend the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 the better. If we transfer responsibility for rent supplement to local authorities, it will be critical that we ensure landlords do not receive rent supplement unless they are registered. Last year the PRTB found that a substantial number of landlords were not registered. We must address this issue. If landlords are tax compliant, we will have an opportunity to obtain perhaps 20% or 25% of the outlay of the rent supplement scheme, which costs approximately €500 million per annum. We must start to get some of this money back and get better value for it.
It is my intention to issue circulars to ensure standardised criteria apply. These should not be excessively onerous on those who seek to secure a place on the housing list. As the Deputy will be aware, the number on the housing list was found to be more than 100,000 on 1 March. However, the figure is a moveable feast and I have no doubt it has increased significantly in the meantime. We are obliged to ascertain the number on the housing list every three years. I intend to do so more frequently to ensure the figures are up to date. If we were to calculate the number on the housing list tomorrow, I have no doubt the figure would have increased to 115,000. I also live in the real world. I will address in a constructive manner the issues raised by the Deputy.
3 Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government in relation to the five person committee recently appointed to assess the viability of merging Waterford City Council with Waterford County Council, known as the Waterford Local Government Committee, if he will clarify the reason there are no publically elected members from either the city or county councils appointed to this committee; the reason this committee was not chosen by the independent commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30728/11]
View answerThe Waterford Local Government Committee is a statutory committee established under the Local Government Act 1991 to carry out a review of local government arrangements in Waterford and submit a report containing recommendations on whether the county council and city council of Waterford should be unified. The appointment of members to the committee was undertaken in accordance with, inter alia, section 28(4)(d) of the 1991 Act which provides for the disqualification of certain persons from membership, including members of a local authority. Accordingly, I have no discretion in that regard.
The appointment of the five members in question was based on their range of knowledge, experience and expertise, including in local government matters; public administration generally; business and development; and their knowledge of matters relevant to Waterford. I have full confidence in their ability to examine the issues rigorously and report in an objective and informed manner and in accordance with their terms of reference, a copy of which was issued on 23 September and is available on my Department's website.
The work of the Waterford Local Government Committee is an important component of an overall programme of reform and development in the local government sector, under which significant decisions in the case of counties Limerick and Tipperary have already been taken by the Government. The report of the committee which is to be submitted to me not later than 29 February 2012 will be published and I will bring proposals to the Government for decision in relation to local government arrangements in Waterford in the light of the committee's findings. To ensure public representatives are informed of matters relating to these issues, regular briefings will be provided for the committees of the relevant local authorities on the implementation of any measures to be introduced.
As the Minister is well aware, the merging of Government bodies is always fraught with danger. Job losses are inevitable, whether they are councillors, who one must remember are also workers, or local authority staff. Many are concerned about the potential for job losses. It is still unclear whether the independent commission could have been brought on board in terms of the Waterford Local Government Committee. I hope the committee will not be influenced by the Government. Its members must not be former members or supporters of the Government or related to members of the Government. This is a reasonable concern, given that the decision pending which is due in February could result in job losses.
The Minister who was a very good councillor will know that county and city councillors work at the coalface. I will be nice to the Minister for a couple of seconds. He realises these people know what is happening on the ground. With regard to the European study, we represent more people than many other councils. It would be a disaster were the Minister to consider reducing the size of city or county councils. That would not be in line with local government reform or being up-front with people.
I gather the Minister will be in contact with city and county local authorities before any decision is made and I am delighted this is the case.
I cannot appoint local representatives to this group because it would be illegal to do so. I am sure the Deputy does not advocate that I should do something illegal.
I ask the Minister to meet them.
I will not meet any representative of any local authority until such time as the group reports. It was set up to ascertain the position regarding possible synergy and efficiencies in the Waterford local government system. That will mean reduced charges and reduced waste of resources which occurs because of current duplication. The group is looking at all these issues and its terms of reference are very clear. I have full confidence in every member of the committees whose names I read out.
I do not question that.
The Deputy should wait for the outcome of these deliberations.
I do not question the people appointed by the Minister.
The Deputy may say they were Government appointees. They are, but they are very independent-minded people who are able to make up their own minds, based on the terms of reference laid down for them. I have full confidence that these people will produce a report by the end of February. Let us then discuss the contents of that report. We will give them that chance.
4 Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his views on financial grants for those rural households who must upgrade their septic tanks following inspection by his Department in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30522/11]
View answerIn October 2009, the European Court of Justice ruled that Irish legislation does not adequately provide for domestic waste water from septic tanks to be recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes which could harm the environment. Accordingly, the ECJ found that our legislation is, therefore, not compliant with the waste directive. I expect to bring a new Bill to establish a system of registration and risk-based inspection of septic tanks and other on-site systems to Government shortly seeking approval for its publication. Full details of how the new system will operate will be announced at that time.
The remedial action required on foot of an inspection of a septic tank under the new system will, in many cases, only involve householders having to empty or de-sludge their tanks more frequently. In other cases, householders may be required to upgrade or replace their septic tanks.
The question of introducing a grants scheme for any purpose must be very carefully considered in light of the current very significant budgetary constraints. My Department will keep under review options to provide financial support to householders, whose systems are deemed, following inspection, to require substantial remediation or upgrading. Any such support would have to take account of the overall budgetary situation and of the financial position of individual households.
To be fair, the Minister met the IFA on this point and that organisation was first to moot it. It comes on foot of some of the recent retro-fit schemes which were grant-aided through Sustainable Energy Ireland. The case has been put succinctly by the IFA and others in this House that such a scheme should be a product of a new registration regime. We should make every effort and strive to implement this, not only for the jobs involved but because it will encourage people to comply with the new regime when it is up and running.
Perhaps the Minister might address the household charge. There is a division between urban and rural Ireland in that the registration charge will affect rural dwellers only. That bone of contention has been articulated in this House and outside it. When water metering is rolled out — I am not trying to stray from waste disposal — and each dwelling in urban Ireland has a water meter will there be an attempt to promote equity between urban and rural dwellers? Is there such thinking somewhere within the bowels of the Minister's Department? I do not claim it is the Minister's thinking but indications are emanating of a policy that would charge urban Ireland for waste water treatment according to the water-in water-out model that currently exists for waste water treatment charges to commercial premises.
I certainly have heard nothing of that kind said in the Department. If the Deputy is advocating that proposal, fair enough.
I am not advocating it, rather I am giving the Minister an opportunity to knock it on its head.
No, I have not heard anything about it. It is certainly not my intention to do that. Water charges by metering will be introduced in due course, as a separate charge from the household charge, as the Deputy knows. We always stated that would be the case.
The registration charge is a nominal amount. Some septic tanks date back pre-1963. We must ensure we catch everybody in the sense of what we know exists in the form of a septic tank. We believe there are 475,000 in total. There will not be an annual charge of €300 per annum, as was advocated by the IFA and others. I understand the IFA stated it would cost €150 million to remediate some of the problems with septic tanks. If that is the case we have a very serious problem but I do not envisage any such expenditure being required to upgrade septic tanks for the purpose of improving our ground water. It is a risk-based model and I believe people will be satisfied with the monitoring and inspection that will be carried out.
I cannot consider a grant scheme, perhaps until 2014, because inspections will not take place until 2013. That will give us an idea of the extent of the problem. If help is needed for low-income families it can be considered at that stage.
5 Deputy Dessie Ellis asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the action he will take to support the residents of Priory Hall, Donaghmede, Dublin, who have had to evacuate their homes due to totally inadequate fire safety and bad construction; if he will carry out an urgent review and reform of building and fire regulations and inspection regimes, ending self regulation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30671/11]
View answerFollowing an application by Dublin City Council, a High Court Order was granted on 14 October 2011 for the evacuation of the development at Priory Hall on the grounds that it is unsafe. My Department understands that, following a further hearing on 17 October 2011, a stay has been put on the evacuation order until 20 October 2011, and that the developer has committed to carrying out a schedule of necessary remedial works in the coming weeks. Dublin City Council has also made arrangements for the temporary accommodation of the affected residents.
The events of the past week have come on the back of more than two years of enforcement activity and discussions with the developer. It is an extremely distressing and stressful situation for the residents at Priory Hall who, through no fault of their own, have had to struggle with the consequences of building defects.
I attach high priority to consumer protection in the area of quality construction of new dwellings. That is why I announced in July 2011 a number of measures to be advanced by my Department and local authorities with a view to improving compliance with, and oversight of, the requirements of the building regulations.
In broad terms the measures will involve: the introduction of mandatory certificates of compliance by builders and designers of buildings confirming that the statutory requirements of the building regulations have been met; more efficient pooling of building control staff and resources across the local authority sector to ensure more effective and meaningful oversight of building activity; standardised approaches and common protocols to ensure nationwide consistency in the administration of building control functions; and better support and further development of the building control function nationwide.
Implementation of these measures is being advanced as quickly as possible in consultation with the relevant stakeholders.
I acknowledge the presence of two of the Priory Hall residents in the Visitors Gallery. Last week they were made refugees in their own country because of the unscrupulous and disgraceful developers, Coalport, and totally inadequate planning laws. Has the Minister met the Dublin City Council manager or the city housing manager to address the housing needs of these residents? I understand the Minister's point regarding the action Coalport is supposed to take. However, it is a very serious situation.
What does the Minister know of the proposed arrangements with NAMA? Can he take action to ensure the cost of renting NAMA properties is not borne by the residents or the city council but by Coalport? Is the Minister aware that Dublin City Council is carrying out the building investigation into Priory Hall? This was promised to conclude in three weeks' time. Will the Minister ask the council to ensure it will be concluded and the report published in this promised timeframe?
The situation for people with mortgages on apartments in Priory Hall is dire. How will their plight be addressed? Will the Minister agree to meet residents to discuss this and all other issues, and will he keep a hands-on approach? What action will he take to reform the planning, building and fire safety laws and end so-called self-regulation? He mentioned some actions but it is important to have proper inspection of buildings to prevent such a scandal ever happening again.
A robust system of controls does exist. That is why Dublin City Council has been trying for two years to oblige the developer involved in this case to carry out certain works in order to ensure the building met fire compliance standards. The developer chose to ignore the council's directions in this regard. As a result, the latter had no option but to take the matter before the courts in August 2010. I appreciate the courts system is somewhat slow. However, the local authority, which has a devolved function in this case, acted as quickly as possible. I expect it will publish the report in three weeks' time.
As the Deputy is aware, the unfortunate residents who have been caught up in this situation through no fault of their own are in temporary accommodation. NAMA has made a schedule of properties known to Dublin City Council, not the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, in respect of this matter. I will continue to do everything in my power to facilitate the actions undertaken by the council to provide, in so far as is possible, the residents with assistance in order that they might overcome the trauma which has been visited upon them. I will also do everything in my power to ensure the developer who caused this problem will be brought to book and that the High Court proceedings, which are ongoing, will be concluded as quickly as possible in order that there might be certainty with regard to improvements required in respect of this particular building. We must ensure the families involved will be able to return to permanent, independent living accommodation as quickly as possible.
The Minister stated there is a robust system in place. It is my experience that this system is paper-driven rather than being based on inspections. The position is similar in respect of many local authorities. There are many problems with housing schemes and developments throughout the country. This is true of the area in which I live, north-west Dublin, where the system relating to the policing of developments was extremely lax. There is a need to tighten up the system and to adopt a hands-on approach. In that context, it is extremely important that physical inspections should take place.
I agree with Deputy Ellis. It is important that such inspections should take place. That is why, before any of the difficulties relating to Priory Hall began, I was taking action under the Building Control Acts. I am changing the system as quickly as possible but there is a need for some consultation with the relevant stakeholders in order to ensure we get it right. We are determined to get it right and all local authorities may rest assured that a mandatory certification process will replace the self-regulation model which obtained in the past.
