I will now address Amendment No. 8, which was tabled by Deputies Ó Broin, Doherty, McGettigan, Conway-Walsh and Mac Lochlainn. I take the points made by the Deputies that there is an urgent need to increase capacity throughout the country. There is also an urgent need to increase affordability in the housing sector and to increase capacity in the private rental sector and the rental sector in general. This is obviously a very acute issue, particularly in Donegal, which is obviously the county most affected by defective blocks. I accept that amendments can be introduced to try to oblige the Government to bring forward reports on measures. Because this is a tax measure, however, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has no remit in respect of it. I suggest continued consultation with the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance and his Department. I am not sure whether it was the previous Minister for Finance or the Tánaiste, who took up the role just recently, that the Deputy was consulting with. That would be my suggestion because tax measures are the responsibility of the Minister for Finance as opposed to the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage.
Sentiment score: 0.05
I was not reading from a script. Deputy Doherty mentioned, in the example he provided, that perhaps a policy instruction came from the Department of justice and that the Department of Finance legislated for it. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is legislating in this instance, and there may be policy discussions. Quite often in the context of housing policies we suggest taxation measures. However, those measures are always legislated for by the Department of Finance. We are here dealing with legislation. I am not sure if I am being clear enough on that. If there were taxation measures involved, legislation would have to be brought forward by the Department of Finance, as in the example the Deputy just cited. I appreciate the comments made in relation to rental capacity and capacity in generally, especially in the context of how acute the situation is in Donegal.
Sentiment score: 0.12
There were accusations of a lack of political leadership and I have to dispute that. Since the Minister took up the position his focus has been on increasing supply and increasing viability. In the ten or so months he has been in the position he has introduced a range of policy measures and legislation to do that. I know this legislation was also a priority. I am sure Sinn Féin could have drafted the Bill in a number of hours but these Bills have to withstand scrutiny so it is not as simple as the Deputy says. The officials cannot address the Dáil but I will have to defend them as well in terms of their dedication to getting this right. If the Deputy ever gets into power, these are officials he will have to work with so it is a bit disrespectful to point the finger like that. We are here, we are in government, we are the politicians, we are the decision-makers and we are well able to stand up for ourselves.
Sentiment score: 0.06
I had to dispute that. Again, what is being asked for here is a taxation measure and to speak to the amendment, it is something we cannot deal with here.
Sentiment score: -0.20
I move amendment No. 13: In page 6, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following: “Interpretation ( Part 2 ) 3. In this Part, “Principal Act” means the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks Act 2022.”.
Sentiment score: -0.36
The amendment proposes to insert a new section into the Bill that would amend section 3 of the principal Act. Section 3 relates to regulations made under the principal Act. I understand the Deputy is seeking to mandate an online portal to make the documents relating to the scheme available online. I am satisfied this information is already accessible online through web pages managed by my Department and those operated by designated local authorities and therefore I cannot accept the amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.04
I propose to deal with amendments Nos. 16, 50, 55 and 56 as tabled by Deputy Ward. Amendment No. 16 proposes to replace text in section 5 of the Principal Act. It will require designated local authorities to publish statistics on a quarterly basis under various headings. My Department already maintains and publishes statistics relating to the scheme, updated on a monthly basis on its DCB webpage. Any additional statistics required on foot of amendments contained in this Bill will be considered, where appropriate, and incorporated into the published scheme of statistics going forward. Amendment No. 50 proposes to insert a new section in the Bill that would mandate the production of an annual report into the operation of sections 23A and 23B of the Bill, including various statistics. I am satisfied the reporting requirements contained in the principal Act are adequate as they include the full operation of the Act and amendments brought under the Bill will be encompassed in these reports where required. Furthermore, I have already pointed out my Department publishes monthly statistics pertaining to the grant scheme and the make-up of these statistics will be reviewed and updated where required upon commencement of the amendment Act. This will give real-time information that can easily be accessed online by Deputy Ward and, of course, other stakeholders. Amendment No. 55 proposes to insert a new subsection that mandates the appeals panel to publish certain anonymised information pertaining to the decisions it makes. The appeals panel is already under significant pressure to issue decisions to appellants and mandating further work for it to undertake at this time is counterproductive. Statistics around the work of the appeals panel are under review and, where appropriate, will be published in due course. The appeals panel is statutorily independent of the Department and the Minister. It is a matter for it, in the first instance, regarding the information it provides. I understand it is open to looking at how it communicates its work. The Department stands ready to assist and fund this, if required, including, for example, the use of a bespoke appeals panel website. However, for now I understand the panel is quite rightly concerned about improving the speed at which it can issue decisions to homeowners and is concentrating its efforts on this issue for now. Amendment No. 56 proposes an amendment to mandate the production of an annual report that summarises technical data that may be held by designated local authorities or the Housing Agency. Information of this nature does not relate to the operation of the grant scheme under the principal Act and for this reason I cannot support this amendment. For the reasons set out above, I am unable to accept these amendments.
Sentiment score: 0.06
I move amendment No. 20: In page 7, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: “Damage threshold for attached dwellings 7. The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following section after section 15: “15A.(1) Where a determination is made under section 15(1)(b) that a relevant dwelling does not meet the damage threshold, the relevant owner may make a notification under subsection (2) where— (a) the relevant dwelling is— (i) terraced or semi-detached, and (ii) connected to another relevant dwelling, (in this section the first-mentioned relevant dwelling is referred to as an ‘attached dwelling’), and (b) the Housing Agency has approved a remediation option and remediation option grant under section 16(4)(a) in relation to the relevant dwelling referred to in paragraph (a)(ii). (2) The relevant owner referred to in subsection (1) may notify the designated local authority that he or she is seeking a determination under section 15(1)(a) that the attached dwelling meets the damage threshold. (3) A notification under subsection (2) shall— (a) be made in such form and manner as may be prescribed, and (b) be accompanied by— (i) such evidence as may be prescribed of the matters referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1), and (ii) such other documents or information as may be prescribed for the purposes of the notification. (4) The designated local authority shall, having regard to any matters prescribed under subsection (8), consider the notification under subsection (2) and decide— (a) where it is satisfied that the notification is made in accordance with subsection (3), that the Housing Agency shall be deemed to have made a determination under section 15(1)(a) that the attached dwelling meets the damage threshold, or (b) where it is not satisfied that the notification is made in accordance with subsection (3), that the determination of the Housing Agency under section 15(1)(b) in relation to the attached dwelling remains valid. (5) The designated local authority shall, as soon as practicable, notify the relevant owner of the attached dwelling and the Housing Agency of its decision under subsection (4). (6) Where a decision is made under subsection (4)(b), a notification under subsection (5) shall state that the relevant owner of the attached dwelling may appeal the decision in accordance with Part 5 within 90 days of the date of the notification. (7) Where a decision is made under subsection (4)(a), the Housing Agency shall, notwithstanding the criteria prescribed under section 16(10)(c), in so far as is possible, prioritise the assessment and consideration of the application under section 16. (8) The Minister may prescribe the matters to which a designated local authority is to have regard in considering the notification under subsection (2). (9) In this section, ‘damage threshold’ has the meaning given to it by section 15.”.”. I will now speak to amendment No. 20. Amendment No. 20 proposes the insertion of a new section 15A into the principal Act. This new section relates to the conditions certain conjoined dwellings such as semi-detached homes, terraced houses, etc., must meet in order to be eligible for the DCB grant scheme. It provides that where a relevant dwelling has not met the damage threshold for entry to the scheme and is attached to another relevant dwelling that has received a grant determination under the principal Act, the relevant owner of the dwelling that has not met the damage threshold can notify their designated local authority they are seeking a determination that their dwelling is deemed to meet the damage threshold. In effect, it allows them to bypass the damage threshold stage but they are still bound by all other parts of the eligibility assessment process. Where the designated local authority is satisfied, it will notify the Housing Agency of its decision and the Housing Agency will arrange for the assessment and consideration of the application and determine the appropriate grant option and amount for the dwelling. Although the principal Act does not include homeowners who wish to carry out works at the same time to the attached dwelling from doing so, it provides that each dwelling must have met the damage threshold before the application can be passed to the Housing Agency for grant determination. This can result in a delay for the relevant owners of the attached dwellings. This amendment will provide much-needed flexibility and assistance to homeowners of attached dwellings.
Sentiment score: 0.16
I am glad Deputy Mac Lochlainn referenced the fine Government TDs that we have in Donegal. Deputies Gallagher and McConalogue are speaking to the same constituents the Deputy is speaking to. They are listening, they are hearing them and they represent them. The Opposition does not have a monopoly on how they represent the people of Donegal and those impacted by defective blocks. The Government Deputies would have addressed the fact that there are anomalies and the scheme is too restrictive when it comes to conjoined houses, detached houses and terraced houses. That was something that we were hearing and there was a need to address that. What this amendment does is address that and introduces greater flexibility. Deputy Ward spoke about the damage threshold. This is exactly what this amendment does. It effectively allows us to bypass that damage threshold in certain instances.
Sentiment score: 0.02
That is important. It allows flexibility and assistance where it is needed. That is simply what the amendment does.
Sentiment score: 0.18
Where did the Deputy get that from?
Sentiment score: 0.00
I never said that.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I appreciate all the kind invitations to Donegal. It must be the second most beautiful county in the country.
Sentiment score: 0.68
On a serious note, in fairness, Deputy Ward has lived through this and understands. I certainly do not intend to get into the minutiae and discuss various cases. A plethora of potential situations have been raised by Deputies, but the simple way to explain things is that the amendment attempts to address what we were told was rigidity in the scheme. We were told the old scheme was restrictive when it came to conjoined, terraced and detached houses. The amendment tries to introduce flexibility. We keep hearing about the onus in terms of the damage threshold. This measure effectively provides an opportunity to bypass damage thresholds in the situations in question. I am aware that Deputy Ó Broin has read this amendment a few times. I do not think I can be any clearer in respect of it. What it attempts to do is quite straightforward. I really hope we will have the full support of the House on it.
Sentiment score: 0.12
We can issue a briefing note.
Sentiment score: 0.00