asked the Minister for the Environment if he will reconsider his recent directive to local authorities on rent increases, in particular the section referring to the principal wage-earner in a household, in view of its impact on low paid workers and social welfare recipients.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rent Increases Directives.
41.
Arising out of the annual revision of rent for local authority houses, I recently introduced an amended scheme to take effect from 1 May last. Under previous schemes certain anomalies existed in so far as the assessment for rent purposes of the income of social welfare recipients was concerned. Some incomes were assessed at 50 per cent while others were assessed at 100 per cent.
Is that the same reply, Minister?
This is question No. 41.
It is similar to the reply we had to the previous question. We are on question No. 41 if it has not been already answered with the previous questions.
I did not get a reply to Question No. 41.
Questions Nos. 39, 40 and 41 were answered previously.
They were not.
Question No. 41.
I am satisfied that the scheme as revised is fair and equitable to both local authorities and tenants and is designed to ensure that no tenant is required to pay a rent which he cannot reasonably afford. The concept of a principal income or principal wage earner in the household has been an integral provision in previous differential rent schemes. I consider that altering the present scheme so as to allow the tenant to be regarded as the principal earner in all cases, regardless of the income of any other member of the household in receipt of income, could not be justified. The differential rent scheme is based on household income and family circumstances and I am satisfied that the current scheme ensures that tenants are not called upon to pay a rent which they cannot afford.
How can the Minister justify a situation where a tenant is now expected to pay a major increase when that tenant may not be receiving an adequate amount of money from either a son or daughter who has been classified as the major wage earner in the house?
As the Deputy knows all wage earners in the house are taken into consideration and they will not be asked to pay any more than they would have had to pay under the old scheme. We are asking the people who can afford to pay.
The Minister is assuming that the money is being handed up.
A question, Deputy.
Are they not getting a living there and a house over their heads?
What does the Minister intend to do where the money is not being handed up?
That is a matter for the household.
Question No. 42.