Skip to main content
Normal View

Cabinet Committee Meetings

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 1 December 2015

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

Questions (7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)

Joe Higgins

Question:

7. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach when the last meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears took place. [31774/15]

View answer

Ruth Coppinger

Question:

8. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears is expected to take place. [31778/15]

View answer

Micheál Martin

Question:

9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the number of times that a Cabinet sub-committee met at which housing was discussed. [35261/15]

View answer

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

10. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears last met. [40154/15]

View answer

Gerry Adams

Question:

11. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the last meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears took place. [42219/15]

View answer

Gerry Adams

Question:

12. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach the number of meetings of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears that have taken place in 2015 to date. [42220/15]

View answer

Oral answers (34 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 12, inclusive, together.

The Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears which was established in 2014 has met eight times to date, of which five meetings took place in 2015. The committee last met on 8 October. The next meeting of the committee has not yet been scheduled. For reasons of Cabinet confidentiality, it is not appropriate to comment on specific issues discussed at particular meetings.

The Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears was established to monitor implementation of the Government’s construction strategy and to oversee effective implementation of the Government’s response to the issue of mortgage arrears on a whole-of-government basis. In addition, matters relating to social housing, homelessness and associated issues are discussed regularly at the Cabinet committee on social policy and public service reform.

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply because he said the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears has met eight times. The structure the Taoiseach has in place, and the number of times that committee has met, are inadequate when measured against the degree to which this problem has escalated in the past four years and grown to crisis levels in respect of homelessness and rough sleeping, families with children becoming homeless and the failure to construct an adequate supply of houses. Several Departments are privately admitting they did not see this coming and got it wrong three or four years ago in respect of the crisis we are experiencing. They felt then that there was no need to invest in social housing or to deal with the supply of housing in the private market. Instead, what happened was the decision to reduce the rent supplement and to impose a rent supplement cap, which made the situation more difficult for tenants in certain accommodation. Given that rents have increased by 30%, the Government has created a crisis with many families ending up homeless because they could not afford to pay the rent. We have been pointing this out for the past three years. The Tánaiste and the Taoiseach have been very stubborn about it.

The Taoiseach has consistently been missing the point that those who are renting and perhaps on low incomes or in receipt of welfare payments cannot cope with increasing rents. He pillories me for stating this, but I am not the only one who says so. Those involved in helping homeless families have been stating it consistently since the Government changed strategy on rent allowance. It reduced it, brought forward restrictions and failed to increase it.

That is a separate question. I have been giving the Deputy some leeway.

My point is that there is something fundamentally wrong in respect of the meetings, the structure, the number of meetings the Government has been having, the lack of joined-up thinking and the lack of urgency shown on this issue. That is why we are experiencing chaos for many families and crises in dealing with homelessness across the board and in housing supply. The Government's own targets for social housing have not been met and in the past three or four years fewer than 1,000 social housing units have been built in the entire country. The Taoiseach should contrast this with the 14,000 social housing units built between 2007 and 2010 as there is a huge difference between the two figures. It appears as though the structure has not worked and that the Cabinet committee system has not worked because, by any objective yardstick, what was a problem or challenge a number of years ago has evolved into a full-scale crisis, notwithstanding that the committee has met eight times or nothwithstanding the Cabinet sub-committee structure the Government has established. Does the Taoiseach accept the basic point that what the Government put in place was not adequate and that the number of meetings held simply has not been adequate to deal with this growing and escalating crisis for many families nationwide?

The question of homelessness and rough sleepers is dealt with under the social policy and by the public service reform committee which also meets. This is not to state the question of housing and construction was not discussed directly by the Cabinet. I refer to the discussions that normally take place on reports from individual Ministers. I was not aware that Departments were admitting privately to the Deputy that they did not see this coming. Obviously, when 90,000 houses were being built per year and when that figure fell to 8,000 or 8,500 per year after the crash, it became perfectly obvious that there would be a supply problem. As I stated previously to the Deputy, rent supplement was an issue that put a lot of pressure on people to move from houses because the opportunity, on foot of lack of supply, means that there is pressure for space. The rent supplement scheme supports 63,000 people at a cost of almost €300 million, a significant amount of money. Properties are secured under the scheme and 17,200 rent supplement tenancies were awarded this year, which is an important consideration for families.

Clearly, a review of rent limits earlier this year found the impact of increasing limits at a time of short supply would increase costs disproportionately for the Exchequer, with no new housing being made available to new recipients. Rather than increasing limits, rent supplement policy, therefore, obviously will continue to allow flexibility where landlords seek rents in excess of the limits both for existing customers and new applicants for rent supplement. As I have pointed out many times, circumstances are considered on a case by case basis and rent supplement amounts are being increased above the prescribed limits as is appropriate. This flexible approach has helped 4,700 households nationwide to retain their rented accommodation. These are some of the people who have approached the offices of Deputies Micheál Martin, Richard Boyd Barrett and Gerry Adams, as well as mine. They are under pressure from their landlords to get out, but because of this flexible rental system, the rent supplement amount can be increased above the limit. This has helped 4,700 families, which is an important consideration. Moreover, the rent limits for the homeless under the housing assistance programme, HAP, pilot scheme were also increased to allow homeless families in Dublin to move out of hotel and emergency accommodation to find homes. For those families in emergency accommodation in Dublin city, HAP payments will be allowed to 50% above rent supplement levels. In addition, they are being increased in Cork, Galway, Kildare and Meath, where flexibility allows.

I do not accept Deputy Micheál Martin's assertion that the structure is a failure. From my perspective, it has allowed Ministers, their Departments, agencies and Ministers of State the opportunity to respond at Cabinet sub-committees on issues of the day or issues that are important. The Deputy may have a different view. The system that used to operate previously was that Cabinet sub-committees met highly irregularly and normally met on a Tuesday or a Wednesday. I found that the agendas were long and that they were unable to make decisions because other issues piled up during the course of a normal busy parliamentary week. From my point of view, I leave available one Monday per month for whatever Cabinet sub-committee meetings are necessary. The next meetings will be held on next Monday which allows for six or eight to be held from 8:30 a.m. onwards. Ministers, Secretaries General and senior civil and public servants attend and personnel from different agencies or organisations, as need be, can also attend, if appropriate. In that sense, it clearly has helped with the Action Plan for Jobs, the regional action plans and the development of and bringing to a conclusion proposals that have been put to the Government to be accepted. The Deputy may have a different view, however, to which he is entitled. I must state that perhaps the responsibilities of the committees might be slightly restructured in a different way. The Government has changed the remit of a number of them because things have changed. While families are still dealing with the issue of mortgage distress and so on, it is no longer of the same scale, as was the case two years ago. Consequently, that matter has been put with housing and construction sector planning. Across the entire range of Cabinet sub-committees I have found it to be a highly effective way to put propositions, set timescales, demand responses and move on to the Cabinet, where necessary, to seek decisions.

This question relates to the Cabinet sub-committee on the Construction 2020 strategy and housing and mortgage arrears. I put it to the Taoiseach that there probably is no sub-committee of the Cabinet of which he is a member that is guilty of a more spectacular failure and gross incompetence than this one and all those involved in it. The result of its endeavours, or lack thereof, is the worst housing and homelessness crisis in the history of the State. The position has worsened every single year since the Government took office and since the sub-committee has been deliberating on the issue of housing, as well as overseeing and informing the housing policy of the Government. When one considers what is happening, is this not proof of gross incompetence and utter failure? First, the problem concerns the response to the unprecedented crisis we face, with families and kids in record numbers sleeping on the street or in hostels and with housing waiting lists having spiralled out of all control to the point that one is now facing spending 18 to 19 years on a housing list. When the Taoiseach took office, the list in Dún Laoghaire was approximately 12 years long.

It is now 18 years long. That indicates how many people have come on to the list and how little social housing the Government has delivered.

When these points are put to the Taoiseach, he says, "We inherited a crisis. It is not really our fault. We are now trying to deal with it." That is just not an honest response. He is not telling the truth about what the Government did, which I can only assume was based on advice from this committee. When the Government came into office, it made a policy decision in July 2011 to cease construction of social housing. It is in a circular issued by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, which made clear that the intention and belief of the Government was that it would be possible to provide for the social housing needs of the State by leasing from the private sector. It was stated explicitly.

Is it not the truth that policy has led us to the mess we are now in? The belief was that somehow the private sector would deliver the social housing when it self-evidently was never going to do that and has not done this. Based on that misguided belief, the Government stopped building social housing. Even now is the Taoiseach not being dishonest with this House and with the public when he says he switched to a policy of delivering social housing? I keep trying to alert anybody who is interested in this debate to the fact that when we read behind the Housing 2020 strategy and the Government's claim to deliver social housing, the actual figures make it absolutely clear that 80% of the housing the Government hopes to deliver, it hopes will be delivered by the private sector through leasing. That is a fantasy. That cannot happen.

We cannot debate the issue. The Deputy asked when the committee last met. I gave him a bit of rope, but there are others to ask a question.

I know there are. I did not interrupt any of the previous speakers.

I have tried to give everybody a fair go.

You did not interrupt Deputy Micheál Martin who spoke for ten minutes.

Hold on one second. I have tried to be fair. We have 11 minutes left. Deputy Gerry Adams has a number of questions. The Taoiseach has to respond to the Deputy and I am trying to warn him-----

Give me one more minute, a Cheann Comhairle.

Okay. The Deputy asked when the committee last met.

And I am asking-----

We cannot debate the housing issue.

Yes. I am asking whether this committee is responsible for the misguided policy of believing that leasing from the private sector in general is capable of dealing with the problem when it self-evidently is not. This is something the Taoiseach repeated this morning and I heard it on Leaders' Questions. How can he possibly state that delivering private housing will provide social housing or deal with the social housing and homeless crisis? I just do not get the mindset.

Is it not obvious that the way to deliver social housing and deal with homelessness is for the State to provide it and provide the resources to deal with homelessness? The Taoiseach continues to make the bizarre assertion that by providing private housing through the State via NAMA is somehow an answer to the social housing crisis and the homelessness crisis. From where is this stuff coming? Is it not time to admit that the ideology informing these policies has been a spectacular failure and must be abandoned?

The Deputy is deliberately mixing up the question of social housing and private housing. The Minister for Finance, in consultation with NAMA, has reached agreement that 20,000 private houses would be provided by NAMA between now and 2020 on lands owned by NAMA and with contractors contracted to NAMA. That is private housing.

That is to deal with a serious shortage of private housing in this city and other places. The Government has put €2.5 billion on the table for social housing and has called all the chief executives of the local authorities together and instructed them to get on with their targets and objectives and to start building. That is separate development of infrastructure from the private housing sector.

The Deputy will have seen an announcement by a major firm intending to build significant numbers of houses in his area. They will be private housing, I assume.

The strategy for social housing was published in November of last year. That strategy indicated a target of 110,000 social housing units, as the Deputy is aware, through the delivery of 35,000 social housing units and meeting the needs of 75,000 households through the housing assistance payment and the rental accommodation scheme. Those two together will deal with nearly 90,000 claims for social housing.

I agree with the Deputy that it is not on for anybody going on the housing list today in 2015 not to get a house until 2037. We will deal with that issue. That is why the Government has put up serious amounts of public money to build social housing in order that these things can apply. The Minister has commented on this.

Some 75,000 of those are supposed to come from the private sector.

Regarding social housing, budget 2016 will ensure that 17,600 households will have their housing needs addressed next year, in 2016. That is in addition to those who received accommodation and assistance during 2015.

For 2016, the housing allocation has increased by 18%, or €125 million, from €686 million to €811 million. That accounts for more than half of the budget of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. It is a very significant amount of money, translated in reality to houses on the ground for people who need them. An additional €56 million has been allocated for capital programmes and there is also a significant increase in current spending. A further €112 million is coming from local authorities. I hope they get on with this business.

Clearly, the Government's allocation is designed to meet the target of 22,882 social housing units by 2017. The Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, and his departmental officials have had significant engagement with the local authorities about this. So far in 2015, nearly €500 million in capital funding has been allocated to local authority and approved housing body projects. These projects will contribute to delivery in 2016 and when taken together 17,100 units will be provided next year.

It is not as if Government was sitting back and wondering what should happen here. There has been a raft of measures, including legislation, incentives, changes in the structure of the welfare system and now direct finance to the local authorities from public funding to build public housing for social housing through the registered housing authorities together with NAMA and the private sector in general, to meet the demand.

I am not against the structure in principle. It can be useful to have a core group or a sub-committee dealing with these issues but it is results that count. It is not a question of the structures but the results of their deliberations. Despite the eight meetings and the frequency of Government press releases, we are now in a live crisis. Last December 40 families lost their homes. It is now between 70 and 80 families each month. A year ago more than 300 families, including 726 children, were homeless in Dublin. In May this figure had risen to 900 children and almost 1,500 adults. I do not have a huge amount of time to go through all these statistics.

Two weeks ago, a major European report, the European index of exclusion 2015, found that the State had the second highest rate of rent and mortgage arrears within the European Union. One in five citizens is affected by this. Of the 28 EU member states, this State is the second worst, with almost half of the poorer households paying out more. At the end of June almost 100,000 mortgage accounts were in arrears and just over 70,000 households were in arrears of more than 90 days. All of the bad policies contribute to children being at risk of poverty - 34% compared to the EU average of 28%. Regardless of the structure and the number of meetings, the fact is the Government has favoured the private rental market as opposed to building social and affordable houses in which to house people. The dependency on the private rental market, which is for profit, has driven up rents. Unscrupulous landlords have exploited that and pushed down conditions for those who are renting the accommodation. The committee is not working. The crisis is getting worse day by day and there is no strategy to deal with it. Will the Taoiseach consider standing down the membership of that committee or, as I said to him previously, go to the European Commission to have the housing crisis declared a national emergency? I put that suggestion to the Taoiseach twice today and he has not even had the good manners to answer me. Even if he said to me, "That is nonsense, Gerry, forget about it," but he did not even answer me, he just ignored the suggestion. Would that not be something the Construction 2020, housing planning and mortgage arrears Cabinet sub-committee could consider in the time ahead?

As the Taoiseach and other Members were speaking, up came the magical year of 2016. What would any of the signatories of the Proclamation think of the statistics, which are living people, citizens, and the way they are being treated? They cannot even have a home, a roof over their heads, and they are in danger of poverty on the Taoiseach's watch.

They would probably say we were in a better situation than Belfast. I think they would look at the situation-----

Is that what the Minister of State, Deputy Sean Sherlock, said?

-----where the Government has reacted to an unprecedented challenge.

Come on Sean - shame on you.

I am sorry. Members should speak through the Chair.

What are you talking about?

Far be it from Deputy Gerry Adams to cast aspersions on anybody.

Come on. We are talking about citizens of the State.

The Deputy asked his question. Will he, please, listen to the reply? There is only one minute left.

A total of 87% of people are up to date with their mortgage payments. Those who are in difficulty have had very little contact with the lender in the first place. That is why the insolvency agency practitioners and MABS are working with each individual case to take them out of the distress and remove the fear which had led to the situation where letters are unopened. I hope that in the time ahead the remaining membership of that group, where there are distressed mortgages, can be dealt with. The signatories of the Proclamation in 1916 will ask whether the Government responded to the housing crisis. Given the scale of the collapse that took place, with the loss of 100,000 jobs, emigration haemorrhaging all over the place, us being blocked out of the markets, the people, in accepting the scale of the challenge, have pulled the country back from that brink to a point where we are in a very different position now. One hundred years on from 1916, they would see the path ahead as being one of careful management, competency-----

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

-----in terms of managing the economy for the people to be able to have that engine to drive and invest in services, as the more people that are in work, the less tax they will pay.

As I said, the Government has put €2.5 billion on the table for social housing, in addition to the changes in the legislation and the incentives for contractors, the reduction in rebates, the opportunity for reduced rebates in areas to incentivise developers to get on with it, and the investment by NAMA in more than 20,000 units in the near future. The European Investment Bank has been very open to investment in a number of areas in this country and has been very forthright in its willingness to help. It is helping in a number of infrastructural areas. While we are not at the point where we can say the supply side has been dealt with, a great deal of effort has gone into the matter and progress is being made. Admittedly, we are not at the point where we would like to be yet, but we are getting there.

Written Answers follow Adjournment.
Top
Share