Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 19 Jul 2016

Vol. 918 No. 3

Leaders' Questions

Deputy Micheál Martin

The housing crisis has been developing and, indeed, escalating since about 2011. It is interesting that there has been approximately a 400% increase in the number of families sleeping in emergency or temporary accommodation for the homeless since October 2014. That is a rise from 800 families in that situation to 2,177 in 2016.

In 2012, we only had an average of eight new families presenting as homeless in Dublin every month, but that rose to 40 families per month in 2014, and has risen to 70 per month in the first half of this year. Clearly, therefore, the situation is getting worse year after year. For far too long the last government denied the existence of a crisis and only belatedly declared it a national emergency. It published many strategies which were lacking in detail, implementation and execution in terms of their impact on building new houses. For example, fewer than 274 new social houses were constructed in 2015, and only 28 of those were directly built by local authorities.

The Committee on Housing and Homelessness, chaired by Deputy John Curran, did a lot of good cross-party work in coming up with solutions. The Minister has announced his response today. My key question to the Taoiseach concerns the execution, administrative and statutory capacity to deliver the scale of houses required to meet the challenges. Very few council houses were built by councils in 2015 and 2016 to date, yet we are now looking in the plan at up to 47,000 new social houses. One must question the current capacity of the system to deliver that number.

Is it not the case that a separate statutory institution or agency is required with wide-ranging powers to drive home house building and deal with what is, by any yardstick, a national emergency?

Anybody who listened in this morning to "Morning Ireland" will have heard that we have had children living in hotels in Dublin in recent years, the impact of which on families, mothers, fathers and children was eloquently and graphically articulated. It is a true blight on our society. Notwithstanding all the strategies in the world that we publish, I am concerned about the capacity to execute delivery of this plan. Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the statutory administrative capacity to deliver it exists?

The Taoiseach

As we speak, the Minister with responsibility for housing is attending with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and others at the formal launch of the Government's housing action plan and so the Deputy's question is very pertinent and appropriate.

We have made no secret that the issue of providing accommodation and proper housing for people, both social and affordable, and dealing with homelessness is a key priority of Government. That is why €5.3 billion is being provided, with 47,000 houses to be provided by 2021. Obviously, execution of the plan is an important point. The consultation with the entire spectrum of interested parties has been thorough. I commended Deputy John Curran and the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing and Homelessness on the report they produced. There is an appendix at the back of the plan dealing with each proposal brought forward by the Oireachtas committee, which is right and proper because these formed part of the detailed conversations and discussions that were held by the committee on this matter. The plan contains five pillars. It will be debated in the House this evening and tomorrow, during which time Deputies from all sides and all parties will have an opportunity to comment on it.

It is important to note that in recent years, local authorities have not measured up in the building of social housing to the extent needed. The Minister, Deputy Coveney, has looked at this carefully and has provided local authorities with a €200 million fund for access to sites that are currently inaccessible, either by bridge or road and to allow councils to design their own schemes in respect of certain conditions being applied. He has also provided for expedited capacity for An Bord Pleanála to allow it deal directly with applications that are usually first lodged with the local authorities and then transferred to An Bord Pleanála, such that in a situation where there is no further requirement for information, an answer will be given one way or the other inside 18 weeks. This is a serious attempt, following serious discussions by Government, to deal with this matter.

The first pillar of the plan on housing and homeless deals with homelessness. As the Minister, Deputy Coveney, has pointed out everybody should read the long and detailed first chapter of the plan because of the impact of homelessness. It is not appropriate that families and children in particular would be in inappropriate accommodation, bed and breakfast establishments or hotels. Obviously, the plan is set out in detail and is not only costed but timelined. It will be overseen by the Cabinet sub-committee and monitored carefully by the Minister. It is a case now of seeing if local authorities can measure up to the challenge they have been given with the resources they have been supplied with.

Deputy Micheál Martin

The question is whether the Taoiseach blames the local authorities for the mess of the past five years or their inability to get to grips with it as it continued to grow. I recall being in the House for Leaders' Questions during which the Government denied for a long time that there was a problem. The Focus Ireland statistics in regard to homelessness among children increased in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015. It was a market-led approach and we were told the market would correct but it did not. We got the same response to rent allowance for three years. The Government told us there was no way it was going to increase rent allowance. There was an ideological resistance to it. At long last the rent allowance has been increased. Following engagement, discussions, party conferences and so on, it has happened.

I do not think it is fair to blame the local authorities.

Yes, they need to be looked at as well but it is a scandal that there are any empty houses in local authority housing stock given the emergency. It is incredible. Deputy Cowen submitted a freedom of information request. There are still 2,700 empty local authority houses throughout the country. In the name of God, does anybody realise that there is an urgency and an emergency out there? There are people coming to our clinics who would take those houses in the morning, but what does the Government do? It puts a limit on 30,000 houses, over and above which a local authority must seek permission. The local authority must go through an eight-stage process, which has reduced to four stages. Local authority officials are telling me that this has made it worse. The Taoiseach needs to cut through a lot of this. I put it to him that given the emergency with which we are dealing, we need national administrative and statutory capacity to knock heads together and get delivery. That is the only way it is going to happen.

The Taoiseach

The plan will be debated in the Dáil today and tomorrow. It is important to say that local authorities have performed very indifferently in many cases. Some are better than others. However, they were not responsible for the complete collapse of the housing sector. We know what happened to the construction sector in general. Obviously, many builders went out of business while many others emigrated and the economy did not have the capacity to develop these things.

All these issues are being looked at in great detail by the Minister and his officials across Government, not just in one Department. This is also to address the unacceptable number of families in emergency accommodation and involves looking at moderating rental and purchase price inflation, particularly in urban areas. We are aware of this. There was never a denial of the fact that there was a problem. There was always an acceptance and understanding that the construction sector had collapsed from building 90,000 houses down to fewer than 10,000. There is also the issue of addressing the affordability gap for many households wishing to purchase their own homes. The Minister will refer to opportunities to deal with that which will present themselves later. Other issues include the rental sector, void units and empty houses throughout the country that could be purchased. The Minister has addressed all of these issues in considerable detail through the five pillars, and I hope Members will give their views during the discussion today and tomorrow. It is a genuine attempt to sort this out once and for all.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Three weeks ago, there was a motion before the Dáil calling for the establishment of a commission of investigation into the sale of NAMA's Northern loan book, Project Eagle. The Government and Fianna Fáil blocked this motion. The Taoiseach claimed that the allegations relating to the sale of Project Eagle had nothing to do with NAMA as an entity. Yet it emerged last week that the chairperson of NAMA, Mr. Frank Daly, wrote to the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, in March to say that a member of NAMA's advisory board in Northern Ireland might have contravened the Ethics in Public Office Act while serving on the board. The Taoiseach will recall that this board member was alleged to have been charging clients fees for advice relating to NAMA. It is also alleged that he had an unethical working relationship with the head of asset recovery at NAMA which gave him access to sensitive commercial information. It is further alleged that he was lobbying on behalf of fee-paying clients to reduce loan repayments. In return, he would receive cash payments - the so-called fixer fees - and all this is very well documented.

Mr. Daly's letter to SIPO rubbishes the notion put forward by the Taoiseach that the sale of Project Eagle has nothing to do with NAMA. It has everything to do with NAMA and there are serious questions for NAMA to answer in respect of all this. However, the Taoiseach says there is nothing to see. In respect of the SIPO complaint, NAMA needs to explain why it waited until March 2016 to write to SIPO when it was aware of the issues involved in March 2014. All of this is on the public record. Mr. Daly admitted as much to Deputy McDonald at a meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts.

These are serious allegations of financial corruption and insider dealing - criminal offences. This is the people's money that was stolen and yet these allegations are not being investigated in this State. There are ongoing investigations in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Assembly inquiry found the Government's position to be very unhelpful.

There are also investigations in the USA. An investigation here, contrary to what the leader of Fianna Fáil has said, would not prejudice any of these ongoing investigations. The Government is proposing a new template for the IBRC commission which could work for an inquiry into NAMA. Will the Taoiseach now commit to establishing such a commission of investigation?

The Taoiseach

We have dealt with this before with Deputy Adams and a number of other Deputies. On the question of value for money, we fully support the ongoing examination by the Comptroller and Auditor General into the disposal by NAMA of the loans of Northern Ireland debtors. The Comptroller and Auditor General, as Deputy Adams is aware, is best positioned to independently review the transaction in this jurisdiction. The Comptroller and Auditor General is required by law under section 226 of the NAMA Act to produce a report every three years assessing the extent to which NAMA has made progress towards achieving its overall targets. NAMA and the Comptroller and Auditor General appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts on 9 July 2015. At that appearance, the Comptroller and Auditor General indicated that his next section 226 report required under law would look in detail at a sample of NAMA disposals and a sample of properties held by it for investment and, furthermore, that a specific review of Project Eagle under section 9 of the Comptroller and Auditor General Act would be undertaken. I am quite sure Deputy Adams supports the integrity and credibility of the Comptroller and Auditor General. That report into Project Eagle, as I understand it, is practically completed. It will be debated by the Committee of Public Accounts, which is the accountable body in respect of NAMA. The Comptroller and Auditor General and the Committee of Public Accounts both hold NAMA accountable here. The Comptroller and Auditor General has indicated that he intends to issue a report under section 11 of the Comptroller and Auditor General Act following this review of Project Eagle. This is consistent entirely with the law and with his powers of investigation to scrutinise and report on operations or regarding any aspect of NAMA's work that may arise through its annual audits or special reports about any aspect of NAMA's work. Mr. Daly was doing his duty of seeing that everything was above board in respect of the law and his responsibilities.

The Department of Finance and NAMA have received a draft of the report and are providing comment to the Comptroller and Auditor General on that draft report. Officials of the Comptroller and Auditor General have also confirmed that, given their independent role, any queries related to the timing, content or any other specific aspects of their reports should be directed to the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General in the first instance.

I am informed by NAMA, as I said before, that the loan portfolio in question was sold following an open process to the highest bidder for what it was worth. On the question about allegations made against certain individuals in Northern Ireland, NAMA paid no moneys to any party on this loan sale against whom allegations of wrongdoing are now being made. As I said previously, anyone with any evidence of wrongdoing needs to immediately report it to the relevant authorities. I am aware that two individuals were held for questioning as part of the UK National Crime Agency's investigation into the sale of Northern Ireland assets owned by NAMA. I am advised also that the NCA has confirmed to NAMA that no aspect of the agency's activities is under investigation.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I reassure the Taoiseach that of course I support the Comptroller and Auditor General, but his role is restricted and limited. He will seek to establish the monetary value of the transactions; I asked the Taoiseach about a commission of investigation. When Teachta Mick Wallace raised this issue last week, the Taoiseach gave him a different answer from the one he has given me. This week, he is saying it is okay and that the Comptroller and Auditor General is dealing with it. Last week, he said: "the Minister for Finance has a view that no specific line of inquiry here can stand up and be usefully pursued by a commission of investigation." This is the same Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, whom Frank Daly said he briefed in full on these matters, including on the scandal of the £15 million fixer fee. The Minister has yet to come into the Dáil to explain why he did not halt the sales process at that time.

The Taoiseach will recall that I raised this issue again when he hosted what I thought was a good meeting with the political leaders to discuss the consequences of the Brexit vote on Thursday last, and we discussed the amendments by the Government to the Siteserv investigation. We support those amendments and we support the bespoke commission that the Taoiseach proposes. The Taoiseach will also recall that he resisted an investigation into Siteserv at the time. That did not go away. This NAMA scandal will not go away. I again put it to the Taoiseach that the Siteserv model could work for an investigation into the NAMA scandal. My appeal to the Taoiseach is that he establish this. If he will not, will he get up and tell us why he will not allow an investigation by a commission of the type he is setting up for Siteserv?

The Taoiseach

There are investigations going on in the jurisdiction in the North into allegations that were made here. Deputy Adams makes the point about the Comptroller and Auditor General. Let me repeat for the Deputy that the Comptroller and Auditor General and NAMA appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts on 9 July last year. At that appearance, the Comptroller and Auditor General indicated that his next section 226 report would look in detail at a sample of NAMA disposals and a sample of properties that it held for investment, and, furthermore, that a specific review of Project Eagle would be undertaken under section 9 of the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993. The Comptroller and Auditor General is the appropriate independent statutory body here and the Committee of Public Accounts is the committee that holds that responsible and accountable in the eyes of the taxpayer. From that point of view, the draft report has been presented, there are comments on that going back to the Comptroller and Auditor General, and that report will be obviously completed, presented to and discussed by the Committee of Public Accounts, on which Deputy Adams's party has representation. I am quite sure that there will be a detailed and thorough discussion on the Comptroller and Auditor General's report into Project Eagle.

Deputy Gerry Adams

A commission of investigation.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

Today is the day on which the Low Pay Commission is required by law to report. I gather from media reports that this report was considered by Government today and will be published this afternoon. The media reports made clear that the Low Pay Commission has recommended an increase of 10 cent per hour to the minimum wage. It is fair to say that this is a disappointing recommendation for the thousands of low-paid workers in the Irish economy. For a full-time worker, this would translate to just about €200 per year, hardly enough to lift a family out of poverty, we will all agree.

The establishment of the Low Pay Commission was a progressive move and the issue I raise here today is no reflection on the membership of the commission. Instead, I will focus on the Government's role. In the UK, its Low Pay Commission has been tasked with raising the minimum wage to at least 60% of median earnings by 2020. That was the specific target given to it by the British Government. During the general election, that was the policy that my party advocated. We expected to see the minimum wage rise to €11.50 an hour by 2020, an increase of approximately €5,000 a year. The programme for a partnership Government, published by Fine Gael published with its Government partners for this term, was less ambitious than what the Labour Party set out during the election, but it still included a commitment that it would support an increase in the minimum wage to €10.50 an hour over the next five years. Unfortunately, it appears the Taoiseach has not done anything to achieve that target set out in the Government programme. Instead of achieving a level of €11.50 within five years, if we continue at the current rate of recommendations today, we will not see that target reached until 2029.

My questions are straightforward. Why has the Taoiseach not changed the terms of reference for the Low Pay Commission to mandate it to deliver an increase in the minimum wage to at least €10.50 an hour within the five years set out in the programme for Government? Will the Taoiseach agree to implement such changes so that the Low Pay Commission will have a mandate before it produces its next report?

In light of the recent work that has confirmed the consensus on the living wage to be approximately €11.50 per hour, will the Taoiseach revise the commitment in the programme for Government to reach that level?

The Taoiseach

I thank Deputy Howlin for his question. The Low Pay Commission is an independent entity set up by the previous Government to bring a structure and a realism to claims for increases in the minimum wage. As the Deputy is well aware, the Low Pay Commission was set up because of the nature of the way claims were being put forward prior to that. The former Minister of State, now Senator Gerald Nash, did much work on that with the former Minister, Deputy Bruton, at the time.

The Government was interested in having a low pay commission to bring about independent objectivity. One of the first decisions of the previous Government was to reverse a cut in the minimum wage that had been brought about before, and it increased the wage by 50 cent. This is an independent entity. The Government approved the publication of the report today, 19 July, and the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation now has three months to consider the implications of the report before coming back to the Government in September. There is a minority report, as the Deputy is aware. There are nine members on the Low Pay Commission and three of those had a different view. The report must be considered carefully by the Government.

As Deputy Howlin is well aware from his own experience, the Low Pay Commission values its independence and would not want to be in the position of being directed. The €10.50 rate referred to in the programme for Government was an indication of what might be achieved over a five-year Government. Whereas the recommendation is for an extra 10 cent per hour, this is clearly an indication of how seriously the employers and specialists in the area view the implications of the decision from the British referendum on EU membership. They have made their judgment and I consider taking the possible implications of that into account.

The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation will consider the report in its entirety and has three months to come back to the Government. She will do so in September. As the Deputy is aware, we favour having a position where work is seen to pay and there is an incentive for people to go to work. That is always a consideration that must be taken into account as well.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

I have a very direct question for the Taoiseach. Does he believe that a raise of 10 cent per hour, or a 1% increase in the minimum wage, is adequate? Does he accept that it will be impossible to meet the programme for Government commitment of a minimum rate of €10.50 per hour in five years if progress is made at that pace? To achieve even the €10.50 per hour rate, as opposed to the €11.50 living wage rate, a fresh mandate is required to be given by the Government, so will the Taoiseach agree to give that mandate?

The Taoiseach

As I stated, the Low Pay Commission was given a mandate to make recommendations based on the economic position as it sees it applying in this case. It made a recommendation of 10 cent per hour, or approximately €3.90 per week. Clearly, if that progress was followed on a yearly basis, one would be waiting a while before reaching €10.50, never mind €11.50.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

It would be 2029.

The Taoiseach

The commission, in its independence and wisdom, has taken into account the possible implications of Brexit. If the position were different economically or known to be very different, it may have made a different recommendation. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation will consider the report in its entirety and come back to the Government. I take the Deputy's point but I also feel the Low Pay Commission made it perfectly clear-----

Deputy Mick Barry

It is well named.

The Taoiseach

-----it is an independent entity and it values its independence. It feels free to make the recommendation, taking all these issues into consideration before producing the report, which has been published today.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

For the more than 100,000 families and households rotting on housing lists for 15 years and longer and the thousands of families suffering the cruelty and hardship of homelessness, I regret to give my opinion that this document is an incredible disappointment. At best, it is yet another mirage and false dawn for those who desperately need solutions to the housing crisis. At worst, I believe it to be a cynical exercise in spoof and dishonesty in that it masks a move to retreat from the provision of local authority housing to the privatisation of housing provision under the guise of a promise of an increase in social housing provision.

If that contention is not true, the Taoiseach will be able to answer a simple question - an answer that is not contained in the report. How many local authority houses will be built between 2016 and 2020, the years of this plan? I am being very specific; my question is about local authority houses. I am not asking about the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, the housing assistance payment, HAP, leasing arrangements, public private partnerships or approved housing bodies. I am asking about council houses. How many will be built? It is not in the report, it was never in Deputy Alan Kelly's report and the Taoiseach never answers that question. I believe what is clearly spelt out in this document is that this is all about more incentives, grants and supports for private developers and vulture funds, in the hope of creating a mirage that the private, for profit sector will deliver the social housing we need when it will not. What we need are council houses.

If I am wrong, the Taoiseach should tell me. Will he give me the specific figures? How many council houses will be built next year and in subsequent years? I suspect the Taoiseach will not be able to give me the answer to the question. In any event, the figure will be well south of the headline figures being blasted all over the media at the moment. Let him prove me wrong and give hope to those who have been waiting for 15 years and longer on a housing list. Let him tell them there is light at the end of the tunnel. However, there is no such light in this document, which is a manifesto to privatise public housing.

The Taoiseach

I would have thought that out of all the discussions, consultations and detail in the report, the Deputy would have found something that might interest him. Obviously, he has a different view.

I cannot answer the Deputy's question-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I know the Taoiseach cannot.

The Taoiseach

-----which is why he asked it.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

It is pretty elementary.

The Taoiseach

Let me explain. The Deputy will not be able to answer my question either. Some 47,000 social housing units are to be delivered by 2021, supported by an investment of €5.35 billion. That is real money that is on the table. However, Deputy Boyd Barrett will not be able to answer the question as to the impact of a housing delivery unit being set up in the Department with responsibility for housing. This unit will work with every local authority to improve the opportunity to build council houses. There will be a provision of money for the building of bridges, roads or access points, as the case may be, to get access to sites that are currently inaccessible. Councils will have the opportunity to design their own houses. The planning process will be expedited so that these things can happen.

The overall objective is to deliver 47,000 houses by 2021. It is impossible for any chief executive to say today that X number of council houses will be built by year end. When we take into account these facilities, the housing delivery unit in the Department and the opportunity for local authorities throughout the country to avail of the incentives to open up sites they have not been able to open up before, to expedite planning and to design their own houses, the answer to this question will become clearer as we move along.

The overall objective is for 47,000 houses with €5.35 billion on the table to make it happen. Local authorities have been the subject of a lot of pressure and there was a question on this from Deputy Micheál Martin earlier. Some local authorities perform better than others but voids and the regeneration of neglected houses into liveable units are opportunities for social houses to be provided by local authorities.

It is not possible to answer the Deputy's question directly because the answer lies in the incentives and facilities being made available to local authorities and the chief executives of those local authorities to get on with it and prove they can measure up both to the numbers and the timetable that has been set out.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I did not know this was questions to People Before Profit. I thought it was questions to the Taoiseach. It could not be more telling that, in answer to the most basic and elementary question, the Taoiseach cannot tell the House how many council houses the Government intends to deliver. That confirms that we are just getting a rehashed, slightly upscaled version of the Kelly plan. There are big headline figures but when one scratches beneath the surface, it is all dependent on "incentives" to the private sector in the shape of infrastructural grants and the transfer of public land. Could we cosset them any more than we have already done? Was it not the cosseting and incentivising of these people that led to the last property crash while delivering no social housing? The Taoiseach pursues this mirage but this will be a disastrous failure.

If the Taoiseach cannot answer the question as to how many local authority houses are to be built, which is damning, why did he not accept the recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee on Housing and Homelessness? There is to be no moratorium on repossessions, no request to the EU to break the fiscal rules on investment in social housing and no rent controls. Could it be any more of a mirage than that? The Government did not even listen to its own all-party Oireachtas committee.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy is entirely wrong and I disagree with him. The figure of 47,000 is real; the figure of €5.35 billion is real. I did not hear the Deputy say how many council houses are going to be built in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown this year and, of course, he knows all these answers.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I will give the Taoiseach the answer. The number is 53 while 600 joined the housing list.

The Taoiseach

Does he know how many were built in the past ten years? I did not mention incentives for private operators but I did mention incentives for local authorities, such as a €200 million fund for access to sites that are currently off limits and the opportunity to design their own schemes and expedite planning permissions so that they can get on with building council houses for tenants all over the country.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The Taoiseach cannot give me the numbers.

The Taoiseach

Councils and local authorities are to be given the opportunity to improve and repair voided units and to take over houses that are not finished and finish them for their own social housing clients.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

We need council houses.

The Taoiseach

Every chief executive of a local authority now has the opportunity to work towards the overall objective of 47,000 units by 2021.

There is a special response to the report of the Oireachtas committee, which was well chaired by Deputy John Curran, in an appendix to the report. Each and every proposal that was made has been responded to by the Minister.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Most of the recommendations were rejected.

The Taoiseach

Not all of the recommendations were accepted but the real intent of the Government is to provide, over the five pillars referred to, 47,000 social units by 2021 and an improvement in so far as we will be able to spend €5.35 billion in that period. That is the real challenge.