Deputy Penrose was in possession and had two minutes remaining.
Private Members' Business. - Local Authority Housing: Motion (Resumed).
The following motion was moved by Deputy Brian Hayes on Tuesday, 5 October 1999:
That Dáil Éireann notes the fact that waiting lists for local authority housing have increased by over 50 per cent in two years, that many such applications have been outstanding for lengthy periods, deplores the hardship evidenced by these facts and calls on the Government to:
–provide the resources required to enable local authorities to build 10,000 houses for rent or for tenant purchase each year for the next four years; and
–complete, as a matter of urgency, an audit of all lands in possession of the State with a view to increasing the supply of land to local authorities for house building.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:
Dáil Éireann notes the increase in the level of local authority housing needs and welcomes:
–the Government's commitment to an expanded housing programme by local authorities and the voluntary housing sector and the significantly increased financial resources provided by the Government for these programmes in 1999:
–the action being taken by the Government to increase and accelerate the supply of land for housing including social and affordable housing;
and commends the introduction by the Government of the first ever multiannual programme for the provision of local authority housing to run for the coming four years and to deliver an additional 22,000 local authority dwellings.
–(Minister of State at the Department of
the Environment and Local Government).
I wish to refer to the appalling housing conditions which the travelling community must endure. I am the newly appointed chairperson of Kildare County Council's travellers' committee and the week before last, I toured some half a dozen official and unofficial sites in Kildare. The conditions which I saw filled me with disgust and anger – disgust that, at the turn of the century, families in this country are still forced to rear their children without basic water, sanitary and refuse facilities and anger at the indifference and, indeed, hostility towards the plight of these people. I met one woman who shares her caravan with six teenage daughters in Leixlip. She has no running water or refuse service available to her. The halting site is only a stone's throw from the Intel plant in Leixlip, one of the most impressive examples of Ireland's newfound economic confidence and technological skills. There is no sharper image of the chronic inequality which thrives in Irish society. Grinding poverty, which undermines people's basic dignity, exists cheek by jowl with the giants of the Celtic tiger. To add insult to injury, these people must tolerate the widespread discrimination which is practised against them. Travellers cannot even go to a pub for a drink or hire a hotel for a wedding.
I also met a man who had been given a site by Kildare County Council. His caravan was surrounded on three sides by a brick wall and he was denied access to the river only yards away. On his own initiative, the man knocked the wall to give him a view of the river. He cleared away the refuse dumped by the riverside and erected a small shed, thereby creating a decent site for himself and his family. The bureaucrats in Kildare County Council now want to turn back the clock on his work and surround him and his family with a brick wall once more. Of course, he has been asked to foot the bill. The experience of travellers in Kildare is no different from the experience of travellers in many other local authorities. They are forced to endure appalling conditions and are often faced with administrative pettiness when they try to improve their position.
In recent times the Oireachtas has passed legislation requiring local authorities to devise and implement housing programmes for travellers. However, I fear that the current Minister for the Environment and Local Government has treated this legislation as an excuse to off-load a difficult task from his desk. The legislation is in place but the goodwill and, more importantly, the political will to ensure travellers receive a fair deal in terms of housing and services is a long way off. Unfortunately, the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, and the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, seem quite content to walk away from this problem without providing any political leadership on the issue. No family in this country should have to raise children in the absence of running water and proper toilet and refuse facilities.
At the beginning of this century one of the founding members of the Labour Party, James Larkin, began his political agitation to ensure that the working people of the Dublin tenements would have these very basic services. As the century ends hundreds of travellers throughout the State must still endure primitive housing conditions. This is not an issue on which either the Minister or the Government can turn their backs. It is an issue which requires and demands political leadership at the highest level. I urge the Minister and the Minister of State to have the political courage to provide this leadership.
I understand Deputy O'Flynn wishes to share time with Deputies McGuinness, Carey, Haughey, Hanafin and Brady. Is that agreed? Agreed.
This is the second motion on housing tabled in this House this year – a similar motion was tabled in February. Housing is one of the Government's top priorities and in An Action Programme for the Millennium the Government specifically pledges a continuing house construction programme by local authorities and voluntary groups. It also embraces the improvement and extension of social housing programmes generally. Everyone in this House is aware that substantially increased resources are being provided for the full range of programmes. Members are aware that provision has been made for much increased local authority housing construction this year which will allow 4,500 starts. They are also aware that this is the highest level of starts sanctioned by any Government in the past 15 years. I remind the Opposition that it was also in Government during that period. In that context, I find it difficult to follow the thinking behind this motion.
The Opposition is demanding 10,000 starts per annum over the next four years. I would like to see that number of houses built but I would also like to see the Opposition's breakdown of the figures they believe will make their proposal and proposition an affordable reality. Where do they propose to get the additional workforce required to achieve the aims of the proposed motion? I would like to see the Opposition undertaking an exercise in reality. I ask them to admit that this is a totally unrealistic figure. Even if the Government could afford to provide the housing, the construction industry does not have the manpower or capacity to cope with this level of house building in the timespan cited in the motion.
We are all aware that there is a current building boom and that construction output is soaring to unprecedented heights. We all know there is a shortage of skilled operatives. The Opposition is sinking to a new low by telling the many people on our waiting lists that we can provide them with housing in the near future. They are giving many people, who have already spent far too long waiting for local authority housing, false hope that all their problems will be solved in the short-term. That is a false and very unfair picture. I cannot understand why this motion is being put to this House for the second time this year. The Opposition has been in office for several periods during the past decade and did little to address the problem which faces us.
The housing lists are far too long and the num bers on the lists are unacceptably high. However, they existed long before 1997. We on this side of the House intend to ensure that all those on the waiting lists will be housed at the earliest possible time. That is why I am supporting the Government's initiative and programme for house building. Our strategy to reduce and eliminate the backlog is embodied in our action plan which outlines realistic and achievable levels for local authority house building. We intend to provide housing in a manner which will not contribute to or reinforce social segregation. We intend to provide housing to the best standards of today's markets. We will demand the standards required in today's house building.
If we look at the scene in relation to the house buyer we find that in today's society people cannot own a home without taking on impossible mortgages. Partners' combined incomes will not suffice for a home loan because of the soaring costs of the houses they wish to buy. This runaway prices will make it uneconomic for many young people to purchase a home in Ireland. Banks are now offering far in excess of the combined income criteria to enable people to meet soaring house prices. I shudder to think how couples in those circumstances will cope or survive if they ever suffer loss of income or long-term illness. We must make private housing more affordable.
A growth economy is not an asset if the price of housing forces our workforce to financially saddle themselves with huge repayments for the rest of their lives. People should not be forced to spend a lifetime working for a home. They should not have to bring lifetime debts on themselves to enable them to purchase houses in their own country. They must have the space in their financial commitments to enable them to lead a fulfilling family life and to afford the necessity of relaxation. I know many people of my own generation with big families who have not been in a position to afford to purchase a family home during the course of their working lives. We see the problems faced by students in finding affordable accommodation in cities and towns in which universities and institutes of technology are located. It has become impossible for them to obtain housing at affordable rents. Any housing plan must embody targets which will enable students to secure housing at affordable rents while they are in pursuit of academic and technical qualifications. It is bad enough that they must worry about schooling pressures in this highly competitive age without loading them with the stress and worry of soaring rents and the burden this places on them and their parents. I urge the Opposition to come down to earth and give the Government its full support in setting realistic targets to achieve full and affordable housing for all sectors of society in the shortest possible period of time.
I have served on the local authority in Kilkenny for the past 20 years. The problem of local authority housing has not just emerged recently, it has been with us all throughout that period. While it has gathered pace in recent years, it has not just come into existence since 1997. The Opposition played their roles in the history of this problem. Rather than putting forward motions such as this one time and again, they should perhaps look at the issue more constructively.
An analysis has recently been carried out by many local authorities and it should be put before the members of the corporations and county councils for their consideration because there are many ways by which people can secure proper housing for themselves. This has led to a further problem which I wish to underline for the Department officials and the Minister. Various organisations, including the local authorities and the Department of Environment and Local Government, have made available to people mechanisms by which they can gain a local authority house, a voluntary agency house or, indeed, build or buy their own home. As a result, waiting lists in local authorities are, I agree, unacceptable – for example, there are over 1,000 people on the waiting list in Kilkenny. Yet, the profile of those on the list should be examined by the local authority. It will find that most of the people who find themselves on the housing list are those who are less well off and are not able or cannot afford to provide a house of their own.
While the Bacon report indicates the need for greater density and authorises it, so to speak, greater density in the provision of local authority housing will not provide the solution. Providing local authority houses for the type of applicant on our lists at present is not the solution. We need less density in the housing schemes provided by local authorities. I refer to one being provided in Carlow where the site was to contain 22 houses but the local authority has now gone through a Part 10 process and will provide 46 houses on that site with no proper recreational facilities or social infrastructure to ensure problems in that area can be dealt with. The Part 10 process was put through very quickly by the local authority and was not considered. In fact, delegations to that local authority were either not allowed or ignored. I ask the Minister, as part of this debate, to take note of that particular development and to ask that those who were left out of the process in this case would be brought back into it and allowed to make their submission because of the changes in the density and the problems that will create locally.
Anybody who wants an analytical study of this complex issue should read Dr. Tony Fahey's article in the current issue of the Irish Banking Review. Rather than hurl abuse across the Chamber, I will draw attention to a number of points. In relation to the audit of lands in possession of the State and so on mentioned in the motion, Dublin Corporation, after the proposal of Deputy Briscoe in May, suggested pre cisely that and, particularly, that local authorities would have first call on church and State owned lands.
I would like to remind Members of a few matters. In 1997, the last year that the Fine Gael led Government was in power, 500 starts were allocated to Dublin Corporation. Of those 200 had to be diverted to the area regeneration programme because of the shortage of building land. That gave us 300 starts; we were able to build 126 houses and we had to buy 173. The same number of starts were authorised in 1998 and we built 199 houses and bought 101. Six hundred starts were authorised this year and, again, we diverted 200 to the area regeneration programme. Up to July of this year, by either buying or building, we have set in train 247 units.
As other speakers mentioned, it is a complex problem which we should not throw around glibly. I discovered that between 1898 and 1998, the local authority sector built 333,000 houses. Through a variety of tenant purchases schemes local authorities sold off 231,000, which means there are now 99,000 local authority homes in local authority ownership. That has been part of the problem. We promoted home ownership, which is among the highest in Europe, but the downside is that we are now short of housing stock.
I am a great believer in the shared ownership loans. They have made a great contribution to help people who otherwise would not get housing. In 1992 there were 587 applications for shared ownership loans in Dublin Corporation, which rose to 853 last year. A total of 1,902 families are now living in shared ownership approved accommodation in Dublin city. It is a marvellous scheme and the modifications which have been made to it have been worthwhile. Something which might not be widely known is that while the limit of £100,000 applies to the value of houses in the Dublin Corporation area, it is now proposed to allow applicants to purchase a house up to the value of £130,000 provided the balance of £30,000 can be provided from their own resources – for example, a cash gift or savings or some evidence that same will be provided – this is according to the city manager's indication last Monday night.
The improved procedures as regards the shared ownership loan have been very significant. There are a number of telling points to which I will refer. Between January 1998 and 31 August 1998, 138 transactions were completed comprising ten families who were on the housing list, 14 tenant purchasers and 114 eligible as regards income. The number of people applying from the standard housing list is diminishing. Between 1 September 1998 and 31 December last year, the breakdown is as follows – 141 transactions were completed; none were from tenants or tenant purchasers, eight were on the local authority housing list and 133 were eligible to purchase under the income guidelines. It can be seen from these figures that only 12 per cent of applicants in 1998 were on the housing list or were tenants or tenant purchasers. When you compare this percentage with 1993, the first complete year of the shared ownership loans when the comparable figure was 53 per cent, it is clear that the type of applicant has changed significantly. The fact that 70 per cent of all households on the Dublin Corporation waiting lists have incomes under £8,000 means that the shared ownership loan, regardless of the level of house prices, is not a real option for them. Other options must be considered.
I compliment organisations like Focus Housing which is developing a scheme at Aylward Green in Finglas. It has been given significant funding by the Minister of State with responsibility for housing. It is a complex issue which is being tackled significantly by this Government. Slowly but surely the matters will be addressed in a comprehensive manner. I commend the amendment.
There is no doubt that housing is a major issue of concern. People are genuinely concerned about house prices, the shortage of houses generally and increasing rents. That is why the Fine Gael motion is well intentioned. Nevertheless, the demand to build 10,000 houses for rent or tenant purchase each year for the next four years is simply impractical. It is a wonderful idea but it simply cannot be done. It would cost £3 billion, according to the Minister of State, and that is a conservative estimate. It would lead to sprawling poor quality housing estates – we have been down that road before and do not want to go there again. There is simply inadequate capacity in the construction industry to undertake a construction programme such as proposed by Fine Gael.
The housing problem became a major political issue from about 1997 onwards. I must ask, therefore, what were Fine Gael and Labour doing before that? House prices were rising sharply and nothing was done. Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats commissioned the Bacon reports, and Bacon got it right – the problem is essentially one of supply and demand. The Government strategy to decrease investment demand and increase supply, with all that this involves, will be successful. For example, in relation to private housing, £100 million has been invested in the serviced land initiative, stamp duty was significantly reduced on second hand houses, investors were taken out of the first-time buyers market by the removal of tax incentives, guidelines on greater residential density were published, improvements in the planning system freeing up bottlenecks and improving supply were introduced, strategic policy guidelines for the greater Dublin area were published to enhance the supply of housing and improved accommodation supply for students through comprehensive tax incentives were introduced. I also welcome the recommendations in this document, "Housing in Dublin: a strategic review by the Dublin local authorities". In it there are many recommendations in relation to infrastructural works, water supply, sewerage, waste management and transportation. In all, there are 40 recommendations and these are being implemented.
The assessment of housing needs has just been published. Households comprising one adult and one or more children total 17,000 or 43 per cent, and two-thirds of these have one child. We need to look at these statistics very carefully and seriously consider the type of housing units we are providing. In particular, we should look more carefully at maisonette type housing. I commend the financial contribution scheme, which has been put in place by Dublin Corporation, whereby an older couple would sell their house to Dublin Corporation and be offered senior citizens' accommodation and I also commend the surrender of larger accommodation scheme whereby older tenants of the corporation may surrender their house to the local authority and automatically get senior citizens' accommodation. In this situation, we need to build much more senior citizens' accommodation. Such an initiative would free many local authority houses for letting.
Deputy Pat Carey dealt with the shared ownership scheme. One cannot buy a house in my constituency for less than £120,000 while up to recently the shared ownership scheme limit was £100,000 so that the scheme is about to become ineffective and needs to be reviewed. However, I welcome the recent modification whereby an applicant who offers £30,000 extra will be considered.
I welcome Part V of the Planning and Development Bill, 1999. This is a major initiative which will take up much time in this House, particularly the provision that housing strategies must be prepared by local authorities and all that will involve.
More local authority houses must be built and all the issues associated with the building of local authority housing will be dealt with in the national development plan. There is much more scope for building voluntary housing and co-operative housing. This will lead to difficulties, particularly in the Dublin area due to the shortage of land, and the discussions recently opened up with the churches will help in this regard. I also welcome the initiative announced last night by the Minister in relation to State lands. They too have a role to play in increasing supply and in increasing the rate of house construction. Much is being done but the solution will take time. It is not simply a matter of building more houses. Services must be put in place. That is being done and I am confident that the Government's plan will be successful when fully implemented.
It is a priority of the Government and a personal priority to tackle the housing crisis. This does not simply stem from a social conscience. One sees the Celtic tiger on one side and, on the other, homelessness which is the human face of poverty. I recognise the realistic targets being set by the Government to meet housing needs. It is an indictment of all of us, Opposition and Government, that 39,176 people are in need of local authority houses. It is, particularly, an indictment of our society. It is also a reflection of our success. It is because of returning immigrants and greater prosperity that more and more people want to have their own houses. There are also 6,402 people in need of assistance. These figures show that we need a planned attack on housing lists and on the housing situation.
The Government aims to build 22,000 dwellings over the next four years. This is a plan which can succeed unlike the one proposed tonight by the Opposition. The new starts, the investment being made by the Government, are particularly welcome. There is a need to focus on the Dublin area because Dublin now stretches from Wicklow to Mullingar and Kildare. I acknowledge the difficulty in relation to land and I welcome the Planning Bill which will ensure that 20 per cent of development on new land will be for affordable housing. This will help to reduce the number of people looking for local authority housing. The growth of the lists is due to the increase in prices in those houses. Former council houses in Sallynoggin are now selling for £140,000 which is beyond the reach even of many middle income earners. Fewer houses are available through local authorities as a result of the purchases of the past number of years. Many people are coming on housing lists because development is taking place in larger houses where even people who have always kept up their rent payments are being evicted. Added to these are people who are unable to match rent increases.
Various schemes which have been introduced will help to reduce housing waiting lists but I will focus on the homeless who, according to a recent ESRI report, number 2,900 in counties Dublin, Wicklow and Kildare. Many of those are single men with no dependants which is particularly sad but I wish to focus on young women with children and particularly on Sandra who has been evicted from her private rented accommodation after 11 years of paying her rent. She has a two year old child but was not allowed even to approach the council until the sheriff arrived to evict her. She was then sent into Charles Street to queue with drug addicts and others to register herself as homeless with her two year old child in her arms. She was then sent back to a bed and breakfast establishment in Dún Laoghaire. It is a comfortable B & B but she must walk out of it every day at 10 a.m. and she is not allowed back in until 6 p.m. She has no place to go to feed her child or to toilet train him so that he can be placed in a playgroup after Christmas. She is forced to go into fast food outlets to buy him a sandwich and a fizzy drink. This is not good enough. I ask the Minister to make special grants to local authorities to provide day centres where Sandra and others can go to look after their children, to avail of social services, to meet public health nurses and, at least, to have a base for themselves. Money which is being spent on housing should also be spent on practical care for the homeless.
Housing lists could be reduced by allowing people on small private incomes to avail of the rent supplement to enable them to move into private rented accommodation. I would penalise landlords who do not accept the rent supplement. It is disgraceful that people with rent supplements are turned away by landlords, presumably because he does not want to become known to a tax inspector. I would encourage and facilitate transfers by local authority tenants. At present, in Dún Laoghaire, a tenant must be in a house for five years before applying for a transfer. If an old person wishes to move into a smaller house, releasing a bigger house for a family, the five year rule should be relaxed. Immediate investment in houses which are boarded up should be encouraged. It is sinful to see houses lying empty for six weeks at a time when any private house can be re-occupied in a weekend. There are great openings for the provision of smaller housing units for elderly people.
Our aim is to reduce housing waiting lists and to ensure that people do not sleep on the streets. Building houses is just one of the ways of doing this. There are other ways. I hope the Minister will consider some of the ideas in the other schemes.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I compliment the Minister and the Government for putting housing at the top of its priority list. Over the years policies, developed in the main by Fianna Fáil led Administrations, have facilitated spectacular progress. Unprecedented economic growth, a major increase in the number employed, low inflation, fewer people emigrating and more people returning from abroad to work here are among the factors contributing to an increase in demand for housing in all sectors. In addition, house price inflation has also been fuelled by easier access to cheaper money and by investor activity in the market. As a result, house prices have increased dramatically and low to middle earners are prohibited from access to affordable homes, which has led to an increase in the demand for local authority housing.
I compliment local authorities for the swift and efficient manner in which they carried out their housing needs assessment. It is evident from the overall picture that the need for local authority houses has grown. In the context of this growing demand, I welcome the fact that for the first time housing will be included in the new national development plan. Provision for an estimated 500,000 houses to cope with the demand over the next decade necessitates forward planning and investment. During the lifetime of this plan an increase in provision will be made for local authority housing as well as for social and affordable housing.
The formulation of comprehensive local authority strategies is also provided for in the recently published planning and development Bill. In each local authority area measures will address the demands that are there at present and the demands that are anticipated. Local authority housing programmes have a major role to play in regeneration not only in urban areas but also in our smaller towns and villages. Deputy Farrelly will know that Meath County Council has a policy where planning permission is granted to people in villages on condition that the local need is met, but, unfortunately, the minute some people get planning permission they look for £40,000 to £50,000 for a site in a rural village. That is a shame and that problem will have to be addressed. We cannot condone people who get planning permission on condition that they will sell the site to a local person and meet a local need suddenly increasing the price of a site from £25,000 to £50,000. That is not good enough. I appeal to the Minister to examine this matter.
It is vital in the context of future development in rural areas that local authority schemes continue to be provided in our towns and villages. In this regard I would like to record my appreciation for an allocation of £1.8 million to the North-East Voluntary Housing Association which, in conjunction with Meath County Council, provided 22 houses in my home town of Kells. People must have the option where possible of residing in their own areas. The future of rural economies depends to a great extent on the spending of local residents. Access to suitable, affordable accommodation is a fundamental necessity for everybody.
Since it came to office the Government has taken a wide range of steps to tackle rising house prices and increase housing output. I am confident that a continuation of these very constructive initiatives over the coming years will have a very positive impact on our housing needs. The motion refers to 10,000 starts, but targeting that number of starts is unrealistic and unachievable, given that there is inadequate capacity in the construction industry to respond to such demand at a time when construction output is booming and local authorities are finding it very difficult to get contractors.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Farrelly, Cosgrave, Bradford, Crawford, Ring, Jim O'Keeffe, Neville, Deenihan and Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.
That is agreed.
I commend Deputy Hayes on tabling this motion. It gives the House a great opportunity to discuss the serious issue of the ever-increasing housing lists. Deputy Hayes's tenacity in forcing the Minister with responsibility for housing to admit that there is about 100,000 people on housing waiting lists at present is an indication of how we, as a society, are progressing. I cannot reconcile that with the statement by Deputy Hanafin in seeking to justify that the increasing number of people who are seeking houses is an indication of our success. I do not accept that in a fair and just society people, through no fault of their own but due to a lack of political will to give priority to this important issue, should be continuously placed on the housing waiting list. At a time of unprecedented prosperity it is difficult to explain to people the reason they have been on the housing list for three or four years. The waiting lists are ever-increasing. There has been a 22 per cent increase in the number of people on the local authority waiting list in County Kilkenny.
Some speakers said that it is not possible to commence 10,000 local authority starts, but it must be remembered that in the late 1970s and 1980s, when the country was not well off, a much greater number of houses were built – about 9,000 starts were made in the mid-1980s. That was possible because the then Government gave political priority to those who were on the waiting list at that time. A large number of house starts in all local authorities were made at that time when the country had little money relative to the economic prosperity we have today. It is possible to deal with this problem if there is a will to do so, as the necessary resources are available at present. Given that 3,500 starts was the best the Minister could achieve in 1998, the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government is writing off housing as a political priority. We are, however, living in much better times now. Up to recently there were 40,000 applicants on the national housing list and, with various factors taken into account, it is estimated there are now 100,000 on the waiting list. In this motion Fine Gael proposes to give political priority in the new national plan and in the Estimates to the people who are in urgent need of housing.
Our young people will continue to live in misery and will remain on the housing waiting list for years unless there is the political will to address their housing needs. It is time the Minister for the Environment and Local Government awoke to the reality of the misery endured by people who have to pay high rents for flats in many of our urban areas. The housing crisis will be resolved only by a greater political will to address this problem, not by continuing to hide behind another report like the Bacon mantra.
I welcome the opportunity to say a few words on this matter. Since publication of the Bacon report the Government has made a number of attempts to do something about reducing the number of people on the housing lists. We have heard a number of Dublin Deputies on the Government side, but I would like to know why, when the Dublin County Council was divided into three authorities, 4,000 sites were sold by the local authorities rather than held for development purposes. The Government is responsible for building 7 per cent of the total housing stock built on a yearly basis. A few years ago that figure was 15 per cent. Is it any wonder the number on the national housing list is 40,000?
The serviced land available is minimal compared to the income the Government is receiving from house sales. A year and a half ago the Government would have had an income from VAT on new houses of £1.25 billion. I call on the Minister to make a decision to put £0.5 billion into the servicing of lands around the country, especially in the north-east where the demand is greater.
The Minister gave a directive recently to increase the housing density to 20 houses per acre, but I question whether he wants slums to develop in every corner of every town in Ireland. It is a retrograde step and I ask the Government to seriously examine that proposal. Will the Minister of State ask my colleague from Country Meath to give a directive to local authorities to allow 100 houses to be built in schemes on the new Bord na Móna puriflow system, which could be linked into the main sewerage schemes that are provided. That would make available immediately across the length and breadth of the country in the region of 100,000 sites for building. That would go some way towards helping to alleviate the problem.
Over and over again, generation after generation it seems there is a housing crisis, yet there is no justification for one in a rich economy. Employment is high, yet people cannot be housed. The State is saving on welfare payments for each person in employment. That saving must be redirected to provide housing.
The numbers of people on council lists is growing at the rate of approximately 10 per cent per half year. While the number of new home starts by councils is increasing, it is not doing so at a rate which holds any prospect of dealing with the full scope of the problem. It is wrong that people should be denied a home of their own. A firm commitment should be made that every housing applicant will be offered a home within one year of making an application to a housing authority.
In my local authority housing area the new housing list was published last Friday, 2 October. It shows an increase over the past six months of 40 on the base figure of 1,483 persons. This is an addition to the number the authority directly housed with the assistance of the shared ownership scheme and takes account of those who provided in some fashion for themselves, left the State or the elderly who applied in good faith in the hope of a home in their last years but for whom that hope will never be realised.
The number of starts in Fingal has increased from 85 in 1998 to 134 in 1999 with approval for 500 in 2000. The increase is welcome, but it is not enough because the list stands at 1,523. Even if the authority got the keys in the morning for all these starts it still leaves 1,000 applicants to be housed and the lists are growing by 10 per cent per half year. The 500 starts due in 2000 will not be available until 2001. This is an inadequate response by the Government, which has the financial capacity to do much better.
The figure the Department presents for national housing starts are overstated and include refurbishment of existing housing units as new starts. This is not accurate as refurbishment requires that existing homes are decommissioned. The Minister may present the true net start figures when he responds. He might also advise the House of his new proposals to assist the elderly in securing accommodation in sheltered housing, which would relieve family homes to meet the needs of new housing applicants while improving the quality of life for the aged.
The current support provided under the shared ownership scheme is not realistic in the current market in the greater Dublin area. If the guideline of two and a half times salary is applied to a salary of £20,000 the loan available is £50,000 for the average house. The limit must be raised and the scheme must be revisited to make it function to the advantage of those using it.
The Government can make an impact in ensuring that housing is available. It can, and should, enter leasing arrangements with property market investors, thereby controlling both the standard of properties which housing applicants rent and the rental charge.
The Government has a strong record on macro-economic issues, but its record on housing is disgraceful, deplorable and almost unbelievable in the context of the strong economy we are enjoying. Seven council houses were allocated as late as today in Fermoy in my constituency, Cork East. There were not tens but hundreds of approved applicants. I spent approximately 15 minutes this afternoon speaking to a constituent, a married woman who has lived with her husband and two children for the past two years in a caravan beside her parents' house. She is unable to purchase a house on her own and is depending on the local authority for re-housing. What could I say to a person who has lived in a caravan located at the back of a house for two years and still remains unhoused this afternoon? There is nothing one can say. That sad experience is being repeated throughout the country.
In the booming Ireland of the 1990s local authority housing appears to have gone out of political fashion with the Government. In the meantime thousands of people are being added to the housing lists week after week and the problem is not being addressed. If any good will come from the motion it will be that the Minster of State finally appeared to wake up last night to the fact that there is a housing crisis.
It is not surprising there is a housing crisis because in the tough economic circumstances of the 1980s, 30 per cent of houses were built by the local authorities. In the so-called booming economy of the 1990s the proportion is only 10 per cent. It is not good enough. We can have all the fancy schemes we want – and some good initiatives have been introduced by the Minister of State – but until he returns to the idea of local authority housing as a necessity we will go nowhere.
I appeal to the Minister of State, Deputy Dan Wallace, who is from Cork, to wake up to the figures in Cork city and county and to recognise that thousands of people are living in almost subhuman conditions in our so-called tiger economy. He knows that the solution is to put some of the millions in the Government's budget surplus into public housing and let people have the dignity of a proper home in the Ireland of the new millennium.
I support the motion moved by Deputy Hayes. It presents a useful opportunity for Members to discuss this very important issue. It was interesting to hear members of the Government talk about live issues and individuals. Some of us had thought they had long forgotten to care for them.
In my constituency, Cavan-Monaghan, 1,400 people are on the housing list. Young couples can no longer afford the sites, which now sell for from £30,000 to £50,000 anywhere around Monaghan or even in rural areas. The serviced land initiative, held up as one of the major approaches, at least in County Monaghan, is being held up by planning and ownership problems. It will be at least another year before the initiative will be of use. The new planning Bill is being heralded as another great weapon to solve the housing problem. However, it will not have any effect for years and may not even be constitutional.
Fine Gael introduced a reconstruction grant scheme for residential dwellings in the mid-1980s. It had some flaws, but it served an important purpose. At its meeting last Monday Monaghan County Council unanimously passed a motion which stated: "That this council again calls on the Minister for the Environment, Noel Dempsey, to reintroduce a reconstruction grant scheme for residential dwellings." The motion was proposed by Fianna Fáil councillor Pádraig McNally and supported by his party. In his statement on the proposal, councillor McNally said there was a need for the scheme and that the Government had made a commitment regarding it in the programme for Government. He also said he understood the Minister was giving it serious consider ation. I supported the motion but stated that when introduced it must apply to owner occupiers. It could also have an income limit.
Houses in rural villages and towns, many of them potentially valuable, could be brought into use. This would not only provide homes at minimum cost but would also help towards cleaning up the countryside and town centres.
Housing is not just a problem for young couples and others who need it in their own area. My constituency has one of the lowest third level participation rates in the country. The cost of flats in Dublin or in any other towns with third level institutions is at crisis level and represents a serious impediment to students. If these trends continue there will be serious implications not just for families seeking housing but for students who may have to leave the country to be educated abroad.
I beg the Minister to reconsider the situation. The Celtic tiger has produced a huge budget surplus. We should use the opportunity this presents because it may not always be there.
Recently the Government spoke about taking 20 per cent of developers' land. There is a simple answer to this problem, which is in the hands of the Department of the Environment and Local Government. There is plenty of land in every town and village in the country and there is no reason why local authorities cannot buy that land and service it. Instead of taking it from developers, we should use a portion of it to build local authority housing and sell the remainder to developers. The State has the money and resources to do this. If the will exists, the housing problem could be resolved tomorrow morning by buying and servicing the land, giving it to the local authorities and selling it to developers. This would be a very simple solution rather than the complicated one being introduced by the Minister which will end up in the High Court.
I want to refer to a matter I raised in this House previously. Tenants can buy local authority houses having lived in them for just one year. I have seen this happen on several occasions in my own county. Two years down the road I have seen people sell their local authority house and move into a new house. These people used the local authority until they could move on and build their own house. Local authorities should not sell houses to tenants unless they have lived in them for ten years. On moving on tenants should hand back these houses to the local authorities. Now that there is a crisis, the Minister should introduce a regulation whereby tenants would be required to live in local authority houses for ten years before being able to sell them. If the Minister checks the records he will find that many people lived in local authority houses for two years or less. I will stand over my statement that this is happening on a regular basis and it is time the Government introduced an order to deal with this problem.
The £3,000 first time buyer's grant is no longer adequate. There should be two grants, an urban grant and a rural grant. We should entice people in rural areas by offering them grants of £10,000 or £12,000. A grant of £3,000 is no longer adequate; it should be increased to £5,000 or £6,000 in urban areas.
Stamp duty should also be looked at. I know the Minister has done something about this in relation to first time buyers. There should be no stamp duty on a second hand house provided it is the purchaser's first house and he intends to live there. However, if that person sells the house within five years he or she should be required to pay the stamp duty. Everyone knows that grants should be reintroduced. Drastic action needs to be taken now. I would remind the Minister of State that the Government has the money, the land is available and it should be buying the land and trying to resolve the problem of 45,000 people on the housing waiting list.
The first question to be addressed is have we got a housing crisis? There is a danger that the extent of the current crisis will be lost in the political debate around the Fine Gael motion. The figures are clear. There are approximately 50,000 applicants on housing waiting lists at the moment. This means that more than 100,000 citizens are without a secure roof over their head. If this is not a crisis, what is? As someone who has experience of the property market, I predict that the situation will get worse unless drastic action is taken. The leading independent commentator on housing matters is Tony Fahey of the ESRI. I read an article by him this week which states:
Since 1987, social housing construction has consistently fallen below 10% of total new housing construction, in contrast with levels in the range 20-30% which were the long-term norm in the decades prior to the late 1980s. Increased funding for social housing in the public capital programme in 1999 will lead to some increase in output, but (at around 4,000 units) it will still amount to only half the housing output of the local authorities 25 years ago in absolute terms and less than a third in relative terms.
The article also reads:
Cutbacks in social housing were introduced in the late 1980s as part of fiscal retrenchment, but this does not explain why a low level of provision should persist in the very different fiscal environment of today.
It would be no harm to mention his solution and again I quote:
If we were to take traditional benchmarks as a guideline, where social housing typically accounted for something of the order of 25% of new housing construction, this would require an annual social housing output over the next ten years of around 10,000 units per year, compared to an annual average of 2,100 per year over the past ten years. In short, it would require a fourfold increase in social housing output over the next decade compared to the past decade.
This brings me to the motion. However, my only complaint is that, in the light of what we have heard since Deputy Hayes put down our motion, he is probably a bit modest in his approach. He talks about building 10,000 houses over the next four years but the Government rejects that approach. I appeal to the Government to confront this crisis and I would say to anyone who supports the Government amendment that they are supporting a deepening of that crisis. That is my fear of the outcome of the vote tonight.
I welcome the opportunity to support the Fine Gael motion calling on the Government to provide the resources to enable local authorities, county councils, corporations and urban councils to build 10,000 houses for rent or tenant purchase over the next four years. It is a disgrace that, at a time of unprecedented economic growth, waiting lists for local authority houses have increased by 50 per cent in two years. I frequently meet applicants who have been waiting two, three, four and five years for housing. This is not acceptable. A caring nation must assist those who cannot provide decent accommodation for themselves. It is not acceptable that people are living in mobile homes, often with children who develop illnesses because of their living conditions. It is not acceptable that people are forced to live in seriously over-crowded conditions, often with several families under the one roof.
It is not acceptable that single parents, who comprise 43 per cent of the waiting lists at present, are often the forgotten people when it comes to housing. As a public representative I cringe when a single parent inquires about housing because in most cases it is a young single mother who is often very distressed because of their living conditions. One realises how deeply in need of assistance they are. While these people are eligible for housing accommodation, their chances of obtaining it are very low. Often there are serious domestic difficulties where a young mother is forced to live in over-crowded family conditions or in unsuitable accommodation outside the family home. If the Minister of State thinks this is acceptable, he should consider the children. We are expected to treat all our children equally. Are the children of people on these long housing waiting lists being treated the same as other children in society?
There are 1,323 applicants awaiting housing in County Limerick. Given the present rate of local authority housing, how can there be any impact on this figure? How can these people be given hope? A start might be for the Government to accept the Fine Gael motion. Why is local authority building so low when the need is so high? Local authorities and voluntary organisations built 10,237 houses between 1996 and 1998. Between 1984 and 1986 local authorities built 1,941 houses. Given that half as many local authorities houses were built in the past three years, it is no wonder that local authority waiting lists are increasing.
If one reads today's newspapers one will see that the national media accept there is a major housing crisis. In my own county of Kerry the housing waiting list has increased by almost 30 per cent. In 1996, in the county council area the number of families on the housing waiting list was 500; that number has now increased to 670. The number overall on the housing waiting list throughout the county 1,241. In a county with a population of 120,000 this is quite serious. I wish to point out also that because of Government policy in the 1980s and pressure from county councillors, county councils sold off land to developers for a very low price. As a result they do not have the land bank now and it is almost impossible to buy it. For example, in Killarney where sites are making £40,000, how can a local authority afford to buy land at this rate, unless the Department of the Environment and Local Government is prepared to plough money into it? The Minister of State is a pragmatist. He has been involved in local authority housing all his life and he knows there is a major crisis. I appeal to the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, who agrees with me, that there must be a major investment in the provision of sewerage and other services. Perhaps the Government could do something about this, either in the national plan or in the forthcoming budget and Finance Bill. Sewerage, in particular, requires further investment to allow towns and villages to expand. Housing can thus be provided at a much lower rate where land is available and it brings life back into towns and villages.
In the budget the Minister for Finance should do something to help first-time house buyers, whether by levies or other means. Young people are being taxed out of it at this stage. Where there is one child in a family, people should be encouraged to extend their homes rather than building another house. I fully support this motion and I compliment Deputy Hayes for being so proactive on this question. A year ago when he said there was a housing crisis he was hounded by the Government side and was shouted down, but his forecast has proved to be correct.
The local authority housing needs assessment statistics, published yesterday, are the most damning under any Government in recent years. The figures for cities and large towns leap from the page, but those for smaller towns and rural areas are no less damning for there, too, the need for housing has increased and thousands of people are in a desperate position. This represents a crisis in the lives of all those so affected. During questions yesterday, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, made an extraordinary statement when he said he presumed that a Deputy was, "not asking the Government to undertake a series of measures which would decrease the price of houses and cause negative equity for those who already have houses". I view that as a very revealing remark indeed. It exposes a flawed understanding of the problem on the Minister's behalf. It showed little sympathy for the 88 per cent of those on the housing lists who have an average gross income of less than £10,000, for people living in overcrowded conditions and the homeless on our streets. Nor, indeed, does such a statement show much concern or sympathy for the many thousands who are forced to purchase homes at highly inflated, exorbitant prices.
The Minister should not mind the property speculators. We want to see a decrease in house prices and easier access to home ownership. We must see local authority housing available for those who cannot aspire to that goal. The piecemeal approach of the Government has failed miserably to address the crisis. It should adopt the proposed measures outlined. I hope the proposer of the motion will take no offence when I say that the Labour Party's amendment goes further and clearly spells out additional and important measures that must be embraced by the Government if we are to tackle seriously the problem which must be faced. If afforded the opportunity, I will support the amendment in the Labour Deputy's name.
The housing problem has been in the making for some years, probably for the past decade. We seem to have had this problem for a long time, particularly in the eastern region and the greater Dublin area. We had it in the 1940s and 1950s when a crash house-building programme was launched in Ballyfermot, Kimmage and Cabra. In the 1960s and 1970s we tackled it through the Ballymun scheme by rehousing people from inner city areas. In the 1980s and now, as the 1990s draw to a close, we have tackled it by building satellite towns.
The most recent bible of so-called solutions to the housing crisis is the Bacon report which seems to be the answer to many problems. Back in the 1980s, I had the responsibility of chairing a body called Ergo which was a cross-party group overseeing the eastern region. I signed a report in 1988 with a number of recommendations which now – dusted down and with a different colour on the front cover – turns out in effect to be the Bacon report. We talked about placing 16,000 to 20,000 units on the north fringe of Dublin and everybody agreed in principle. The Department of the Environment and Local Government, and Dublin Corporation have been concerned with a solution for sewage disposal for about ten years longer than they should have. The north fringe is not yet drained. According to the Bacon report 16,000 units could, supposedly, be accommodated but where is the scheme? How long more will it take? Why has it taken so long?
As I left my office for the Chamber, Deputy Farrelly was speaking about Dublin Corporation which, at managerial level, dumped thousands of valuable sites in County Dublin on to the market – at minuscule values compared to today's – rather than transferring them to the South Dublin and Fingal councils. If those sites had remained in local authority ownership we could have done something about the housing crisis over the last three or four years.
When the Government took office two years ago, I said housing would be one of the main problems it would have to face. We now have an audit of State lands. Recently, the Eastern Health Board sold off land at Blanchardstown hospital. Every week in the newspapers there are reports of more land being sold on the market by religious orders and other institutions. The current measures are an attempt to address the problem but they are taking too long. There does not seem to be any line management of responsibility. Lucan, where I reside, is the focus of a major potential for 5,000 new homes, as per the new south Dublin plan. However the planning authority cannot even process the current applications. The absence of forward planners and design engineers on the provision of services is a problem.
In the 1960s, the late Seán Lemasss said the way to control the price of building land is to service more than is needed. That is the point Deputy Deenihan has just made. We must grapple with the problem with vigour and an intent to achieve what needs to be done. We have decided to move away from large local authority housing schemes because we do not want the problems that arose in the past, as in the areas I have already referred to. However, if one is to cater for the numbers required, it can only be done through a major local authority housing drive coupled with affordable housing, which is the new phrase. For the past three or four years, young couples have been paying £20,000 to £40,000 more for their first home than they should have had to. Young couples are penalised with a heavy debt which they cannot afford to take on. In addition, there are single parents on local auth ority housing lists and the tragedy of the homeless.
It will take a wide ranging combination of issues to combat the housing problem. The 20 per cent take is a laudable and principled idea and I hope it will succeed. but it could be cumbersome and cause serious delay.
I will finish now because I know the Minister of State has many more important things to say. I ask the Minister and those in positions of responsibility to take line management action to ensure that what needs to be done is done, and done speedily.
I thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate. I welcome the opportunity this House has to support the measures being taken by the Government in the area of social housing.
Deputy Hayes and others contributed to the debate last night and nothing any Member said countered the point forcefully made by my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Molloy, that the Government has a credible and coherent housing strategy in place which is designed to increase housing supply, improve access to housing for lower income groups and improve the housing conditions of local authority tenants and other key groups such as the elderly, the homeless and the disabled. Each of the Deputies indicated last night that we need more local authority and social housing. Fine Gael is calling for 40,000 houses while Labour is seeking 50,000. It certainly comes easy to Opposition parties to make soundbite appeals of that nature. The Government knows that we need more local authority and social housing and it is doing something about it. We have strategies in place and we will deliver on them.
Housing is a priority for the Government. It is hugely important to individuals, to households and, indeed, to the well-being of the entire economy. Let there be no doubt that the Government is sympathetic and it regards addressing the housing needs of the increasing numbers on local authority housing lists as a key priority of its overall social policy. The Government's actions will deliver more local authority houses and, furthermore, these will be well designed and located in a high quality environment.
The assessment of housing needs released yesterday indicates that just over 39,000 households are in need of local authority housing, compared with 27,400 in 1996. This represents a significant number of people on the waiting lists. The Minister of State last night referred to the sample survey of lettings of houses by five local authorities during the first six months of this year which was carried out by the Department. This survey found that an average of 56 per cent of those who obtained houses were less than one year on the waiting list, 22 per cent between one and two years, 10 per cent between two and three years and only 7 per cent were more than four years on the list. These facts contradict the exaggerated claim that very needy households are spending many years on waiting lists.
Local authorities will make over 7,000 new lettings this year and this means that those in the greatest need of housing have reasonable prospects of securing local authority housing within a reasonable period.
Deputy Ulick Burke raised the issue of design of local authority housing and the need for facilities in estates. It must be remembered that the local authority housing programme of the 1990s is fundamentally different in character from that of previous decades. A key policy consideration is to provide housing in a manner which does not contribute to or reinforce social segregation. Local authorities are providing very well designed housing schemes, often on infill sites, and many of our recent local authority housing developments are a credit to the local authorities.
This approach is crucial in redeveloping rundown areas of our towns and cities and providing a quality environment for residents, particularly older or disabled people, in close proximity to shops, churches and other services. In order to ensure that good design practice is developed further, my Department recently issued new guidelines on social housing design which give comprehensive guidance on achieving quality design and on how to respond in a positive fashion to the changing nature of social housing needs, which have become more diverse and are now characterised by different household types with specific household requirements. Needs being met include not only the traditional family household but also lone parents, homeless persons, elderly persons, travellers and those with physical and mental disabilities.
Local authorities were particularly asked to ensure that the housing schemes to be developed under the new multiannual programme not only provide a good living environment but also contribute to the integrated development of local areas. Particular efforts should be made to use suitable infill sites where development can help to restore, strengthen or upgrade the social and physical fabric of an area and generally facilitate the creation of vibrant and sustainable communities.
A more recent development has been the use of the local authority housing programme as a mechanism to regenerate existing housing in major urban areas. The redevelopment of areas of older housing, mainly flats, experiencing social problems and physical decline, sometimes associated with the nature of the housing itself, is under way in a number of areas and is most welcome. The most prominent example is Ballymun where the redevelopment of housing is the focus for the social and economic regeneration of the area as a whole.
The Minister of State's time is exhausted.
I wish to make a couple of further points.
Mr. Hayes
Time up, Minister.
May I carry on?
Mr. Hayes
Time up, Minister.
There are also widely acknowledged problems in many Dublin—
Mr. Hayes
Time up.
I just need another minute.
There is no further time available.
Mr. Hayes
With respect, it is an order of the House that we—
Will the Deputy resume his seat and let the Chair do its job?
Mr. Hayes
I would appreciate it if the Chair would do its job.
The Chair is doing its job and does not need any prompting from the Deputy.
I have just one more paragraph to read.
There is no further time available for the Minister of State.
Mr. Hayes
Time up.
I have information which I believe would be helpful to the Deputy in his contribution.
Mr. Hayes
I wish the Minister of State had given it to me earlier.
His contribution last evening was not very productive. If he does not want to hear the news, that is fair enough.
I propose to share time with Deputies Creed, Enright and Hayes.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
A welcome feature of the debate is the acknowledgement by most Government backbenchers that there is a crisis in respect of the construction of local authority housing. The Minister and Minister of State should listen to their backbenchers in this regard. This week the Minister acknowledged that there are 45,000 applicants on the housing waiting list. In Galway city there are 1,000 applicants on the waiting list and in the county area it takes up to four or five years for an applicant – I refer to successful applicants – to obtain a local authority house.
There is a great deal of red tape attached to the sanction of local authority houses. Some of the responsibility for this lies with the Minister's office and his Department. For example, when a rural house exceeds the contract price of £55,000, permission must be obtained from the Minister's office to proceed with the contract. This is an unnecessary delaying tactic because everyone knows that one cannot build a local authority house or any other house in a rural area for £55,000. I ask the Minister to raise the minimum price at which local authorities can proceed with contracts. For example, early this year we went through the planning process for nine local authority rural houses, mostly in the Connemara area, and almost a year later we have not received permission to build them. It would greatly alleviate the problem if that upper limit was changed. In the short-term, we should also greatly increase the grant for first time buyers. This should be increased to £12,000 or £15,000 to encourage people to purchase their own houses rather than remain on the local authority list where, in some cases, they have no chance of obtaining a house.
Another matter which is causing great concern is repairs to local authority houses. The repair sections of councils are working on a shoestring budget. There are many local authority houses, particularly on estates in urban areas, that are boarded up simply because repair crews cannot be sent out to carry out repairs. This leads to vandalism and the dereliction of houses. As a result, estates become rundown. I suggest that the Minister introduce a system which would allow local authority tenants to carry out repairs, the cost of which, on production of certified receipts, could be offset against their rent. It is absolutely ridiculous that local authority tenants are obliged to approach the repair section to have a window or door put in or to have a tap or ballcock repaired. Local authority tenants should be allowed to carry out those works themselves and offset the cost against their rent. Many authorities would facilitate that. Housing repair grants, which could be means tested, should also be reintroduced. This would be a step in the right direction.
I welcome the debate. A number of years ago the now retired European Commissioner, Padraig Flynn, introduced a plan for social housing and a number of innovative schemes in response to what was allegedly a housing crisis in the early 1990s. With the numbers on housing waiting lists today – approximately 40,000 – there is a need for innovation from the Department of the Environment and Local Government. That plan for social housing included a scheme whereby those living in substandard accommodation would be given a grant towards repairing the accommodation rather than being provided with a conventional local authority house. That scheme, which also included shared ownership, needs to be revamped to take account of trends in housing prices since that date. The shared ownership scheme in particular could be significantly revamped to take account of the increased cost with a greater subsidy by way of grant being provided by the State to facilitate a number of those on the housing lists.
I was disappointed with the tone of the reply from the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, last night which seemed to suggest that if we could only discard the 43 per cent of the waiting lists made up of lone parents we would not have a problem, as if these people were second class citizens. That tone in the debate was disappointing and not conducive to an inclusive society where everybody on the housing lists is treated equally. There is no doubt that many lone parents would be better off in a family support network but there are others who live in extremely over-crowded conditions and for whom only alternative accommodation will meet their housing needs. In this regard a number of local authorities have much catching up to do to take account of the trends reflected in the family composition of their waiting lists. The knee-jerk reaction of local authorities, even in my own constituency, is to provide a three bedroom house rather than a variety of house styles taking account of the social circumstances of the applicant. There is a greater need for a variety of house styles to be constructed and a better social mix in terms of the design used by local authorities.
An innovative scheme which cost a considerable amount of money a number of years ago was the house improvement grants. The problem with the provision of house improvement grants in the 1980s was that there was no income restriction and no reference to whether a person was renovating a second home or whatever. A modified house improvement grant focused on those on the housing lists would go some way towards alleviating the crisis. One of the positive measures introduced to help rural areas experiencing difficulties in sustaining their current population is the serviced sites initiative that local authorities can use to far greater advantage. There is no doubt that serviced sites in villages and towns throughout rural Ireland can be acquired at a far cheaper rate per unit cost than acquiring sites in larger urban areas and they offer a significant outlet for taking numbers off the housing waiting lists, particularly those who cannot acquire a site which in some rural areas can cost £20,000 or £30,000. The serviced site initiative could bolster numbers in rural communities and thus safeguard local services, schools, post offices, Garda stations, etc. Any leadership the Department can provide in relation to serviced sites would be welcome, particularly in rural constituencies.
Mr. Hayes
Once again, in the contribution of the Minister for Housing last night and his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, this evening, the response of the Government to the housing crisis is disgraceful. It is also disgraceful – and I refer to this on every occasion we debate the matter – that the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, has effectively done a runner tonight; he is nowhere to be seen. Every time a chimney pot is being put on a new house in Galway the Minister of State can be seen cutting the ribbon but when it comes to debating probably the most important political issue facing our country, providing housing for our people, he is nowhere to be seen. He does not want to take the responsibility for this issue and that was obvious yesterday when he decided to publish his housing assessment which confirmed the prediction I made 12 months ago that there has been a 50 per cent increase in three years in the number of people looking for local authority homes.
We have a new "yuppified" Fianna Fáil backbencher in the House at the moment who is of the view, as we quite clearly heard in the comments this evening from the other side of the House, that the poor can wait until the market is right and then they will be able to buy their houses. The poor will not wait. People on low incomes will no longer live in appalling conditions where seven or eight adults and three children are living in a three bedroom house. They will not wait any longer and the motion before the House this evening in the name of my party is asking the Government to rapidly expand the local authority house building programme.
Some people argue that it is impossible to build more local authority homes. That is nonsense. Since 1921, the State has built over 330,000 local authority homes. In the 1970s, a third of our total housing output was made up of local authority homes. Today it is about 10 per cent. The point was clearly made by Dr. Fahey, a well known, well respected sociologist who has written extensively for the ESRI, that the gap is growing consistently between private housing and the output of housing for the social sector. Interestingly, he stated in his article that since 1987 the construction of social housing has consistently fallen. What happened in 1987? That was the time when health cuts hurt the old, the sick and the handicapped –"Vote Fianna Fáil". Every time the Minister's party gets its hands on the tillers of power, low income families are confined to living in appalling conditions. Is it not astonishing that in 1987 there was a massive reduction in the number of houses in the social housing sector? This year the percentage of the amount of money being spent on social housing, the total percentage of the capital budget, has fallen.
I note the comments of the Minister's colleague last night when he said there had been an 18 per cent increase in capital expenditure. That is not the point I was making about this issue on various radio programmes during the summer. The point I was making was that the actual amount of money that the Government is spending as a percentage of the total amount of money available is significantly lower than it was when our party was in Government three years ago. When our party was in Government we spent 8 per cent and 9 per cent of capital expenditure on social housing projects. The Minister's party is spending 6.9 per cent. That is not from my own propaganda department but from the Minister for Finance.
I blame the Progressive Democrats.
Mr. Hayes
That is at the heart of this issue and the Minister, his party colleagues and particularly his free marketeer laissez-faire Minister for housing, Deputy Molloy, who was here 20 years ago—
Thirty years.
Mr. Hayes
—does not want to take responsibility for this issue. That is the unfortunate fact that the Minister and his party will have to face up to throughout this debate. My party believes that this country has the ability to provide homes for people on low incomes. My party believes that this country has the ability to give low income people various housing options to take them out of the squalor they are in at the moment. Those on low incomes, despite the bleating of the Minister of State and his "yuppified" backbenchers—
The Deputy would know a lot about that.
Mr. Hayes
—will not wait any longer for him to provide a response to the crisis – 100,000 men, women and children are waiting on a home in this country. Reducing or stabilising the prices in the private sector will do nothing for them because they do not have the income to get a house. That is a responsibility the Minister of State will have to face up to.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 71; Níl, 67.
Tá
Níl
Tellers: Tá, Deputies S.Brennan and Power: Níl, Deputies Barrett and Stagg.
Amendment declared carried.
Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Andrews, David.
Ardagh, Seán.
Aylward, Liam.
Brady, Johnny.
Brady, Martin.
Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Briscoe, Ben.
Browne, John (Wexford).
Byrne, Hugh.
Callely, Ivor.
Carey, Pat.
Collins, Michael.
Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Cowen, Brian.
Cullen, Martin.
Daly, Brendan.
de Valera, Síle.
Dempsey, Noel.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Fahey, Frank.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Gildea, Thomas.
Hanafin, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Kelleher, Billy.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.
Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.
Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McCreevy, Charlie.
McGennis, Marian.
McGuinness, John.
Martin, Micheál.
Moffatt, Thomas.
Molloy, Robert.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Donal.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Dea, Willie.
O'Donnell, Liz.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
O'Malley, Desmond.
Power, Seán.
Roche, Dick.
Ryan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Smith, Michael.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Wallace, Mary.
Walsh, Joe.
Wright, G. V.
Barrett, Seán.
Bell, Michael.
Belton, Louis.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Ulick.
Carey, Donal.
Clune, Deirdre.
Cosgrave, Michael.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Creed, Michael.
Currie, Austin.
D'Arcy, Michael.
Deasy, Austin.
Deenihan, Jimmy.
Dukes, Alan.
Durkan, Bernard.
Enright, Thomas.
Farrelly, John.
Ferris, Michael.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Gregory, Tony.
Hayes, Brian.
Higgins, Jim.
Higgins, Joe.
Higgins, Michael.
Hogan, Philip.
Howlin, Brendan.
Kenny, Enda.
Lowry, Michael.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McDowell, Derek.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Paul.
Mitchell, Olivia.
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
Naughten, Denis.
Neville, Dan.
Noonan, Michael.
Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Owen, Nora.
Penrose, William.
Perry, John.
Quinn, Ruairí.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Seán.
Sargent, Trevor.
Shatter, Alan.
Sheehan, Patrick.
Shortall, Róisín.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Wall, Jack.
Yates, Ivan.
Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.