HAP to be increased by up to 35%!

jpd said:
While it may be cynical, they are certainly not homeless if they are livng in rented accomodation

The only way to solve the housing crisis is to build more houses in areas where people want to live
Click to expand...
But the budget for building is minuscule now in comparison to what it was 20 years ago.
At least the funds the CCs were getting was nearly all capital expenditure now its HAP, RAS, and the other one.

Edit, I should have added that the strategy in the main appears to get people off the housing list and allow Housing Associations to build along with Nama and as everyone knows having too many chefs doesn't improve the quality of anything except take home salary.
 
Last edited:
Paul O Mahoney said:
But the budget for building is minuscule now in comparison to what it was 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
Between 2000 and 2007 we were building an average of 6250 social housing units a year. Source. We built 8,842 in 2019, the last year pre-pandemic.
We certainly don't want to go back to the 50's and 60's when we were using a large proportion of our national income to produce vast estates of badly built houses with no social infrastructure while massively under investing in education and health. It is only since we moved away from that heavy investment in housing and instead invested in human capital (education and health) that we have been able to fully engage in the global economy and become a rich and successful country. Our current problems are down to a combination of that success, global financial policies since the great recession and, to a far lesser extent, the structural inefficiencies within our construction industry and Public Sector.
Paul O Mahoney said:
At least the funds the CCs were getting was nearly all capital expenditure now its HAP, RAS, and the other one.
Click to expand...
I'm generally not a fan of the State permanently providing things for people which they can and should provide for themselves. State intervention in the market, be it sucking up properties for rent or sucking up labour to build units, is never efficient.
I agree with you there. There must be massive duplication within the homelessness industry.
 
It is only the growth of multi-nationals that have allowed us to become a rich and successful country.
Subtract their effect on Corporation Tax, Income tax, VAT, Property Tax, etc and we are little more than 3rd world.
 
Sophrosyne said:
It is only the growth of multi-nationals that have allowed us to become a rich and successful country.
Subtract their effect on Corporation Tax, Income tax, VAT, Property Tax, etc and we are little more than 3rd world.
Click to expand...
The multinationals wouldn't be here if we hadn't brought our education system up to a reasonable standard. The change in the type of investment from MNC's we have seen in the last 40 years is remarkable. We've moved from mid-tech manufacturing in the 70's and 80's to high tech manufacturing (mainly medical devices and Pharma), ITC and FinTech. That requires a well educated workforce, supplemented by highly skilled immigrants.
I do agree that the MNC's are the engine of our economy. We certainly couldn't have a highly paid State Sector and the services they provide without them.
That all points to the fact that our housing problem is a problem of success. If we still had 50,000 people leaving the country every year, a far less generous welfare system and lots of cheap labour we'd still have cheap houses.
 
Since the state is the provider of all the financial backing for the ," builds " my fear is that there is no accountability on where that money is being spent. We have between 450 and 520 Housing Associations, real figure to be determined, who are in receipt of hundreds of millions in direct funding additionally we know that the larger ones are tapping further funding from our Banks and those amounts are underwritten by the State 100% .

Whether these amounts find their way to governmental accounts or national debt has been beyond my capabilities to find out definitely.

Then theres Nama the mythical monster of everything since inception. They are described as "the largest land owner and independent property developer in the country " ? , but the funds that it uses are again State funds.

There is no doubt duplication is present but it's the accountability of using taxpayers money in a very opaque way and while I would imagine the reality is many billions are kept off the " official books" we are still as a State liable and that needs to be investigated to ascertain exactly how big the hook is.

I agree to an extent of keeping the state away from certain aspects of the economy, but this is one area that needs scrutiny the figures are simply huge and having " legal entities " mostly CLGs where financial reporting isn't as arduous as say GAAP especially for smaller entities we may never know the true figures and that might bite us in the future.


Regulator, especially for AHBs is now set up it will be interesting to see what type of reporting they use, but having experienced the Charity Regulator , who will also regulate many AHBs , I'm not expecting detailed reporting, just headlines and a lot of back slapping saying the same thing.
 
@Paul O Mahoney , the problem is that in a supply constrained market the more the State spends on housing the more expensive housing becomes, the more the State needs to spend on housing. It's a socialists wet dream.
 
Purple said:
@Paul O Mahoney , the problem is that in a supply constrained market the more the State spends on housing the more expensive housing becomes, the more the State needs to spend on housing. It's a socialists wet dream.
Click to expand...
Absolutely and no political party of any hue won't be saying they are cutting the housing budget.

If we leave the construction to commercial concerns the social media howls will be " vulture funds now run our social housing construction " blah blah blah

Despite the CCs owing huge sways of good land in urban areas, they've washed their hands of actually building anything.

The Health Service might be described as Angola, The Social housing industry could be described as The Sudan .......all knocking the lard out of each other and reaching stalemate to the detriment of the citizens.

100 years of independence and nothing achieved
 
Purple said:
The multinationals wouldn't be here if we hadn't brought our education system up to a reasonable standard.
Click to expand...
Hardly! That’s just TV soundbite speak. They have well-educated workforces in their own countries.

It wasn’t our brilliant education system that attracted multinationals here in the 1950s and 1960s such as, inter alia, Liebherr (1958) Leo Laboratories (1959), Warner-Lambert (1960), General Electric (1963) and Pfizer (1969).

It was and still is incentives offered by the IDA, lack of “red tape” and low corporate taxes.

In the 1960s, FDI delivered 70% of new employment and 90% of increased exports in transportable goods.

The MNCs came and better education followed.

People often regard the future as the same as today or the same as the past. Social housing doesn’t have to be as it was in the past.

Because of the chronic shortage of social housing people are forced into the private market, where they cannot afford to either buy or rent.
Ever-increasing government subsidies completely distorts the property market.

Privatizing what is a social obligation never works.

The housing budget whatever it might be, has to have a purpose. At the moment it is like the proverbial eight-legged camel with little direction and insupportable gaps in both knowledge and accountability.

With such a paucity of basic information, one wonders about the value of Dáil debates and Oireachtas committees. What can they possibly be talking about and how can they possibly arrive at appropriate solutions?
 
Sophrosyne said:
Privatizing what is a social obligation never works.

The housing budget whatever it might be, has to have a purpose.
Click to expand...
These are key points and now its really important that whatever Governments we have over the next decade the decision must be made , current expenditure or capital expenditure.

Capital expenditure is clearly the longest route but is imo the most favourable , as more houses are built more people should come off the housing list, and those on the subsidies should be also considered for these. In the interim keep the HAPS etc but start lowering the budget year on year .

I read somewhere that CCs received €350m in rent from existing stock so money is coming in, I'll dig out the stock figure when I can, but more stock more income.

These existing and new houses must be held by the State via CCs they must be maintained by the CCs and they must never be sold, even to existing tenants.

The latter was Margaret Thatchers policy and it literally wrecked huge swaths of the economy especially outside of London, miners and shipbuilders bought their modest homes to end up on the dole, houses get repossessed and homeless increases and 40 years later , those homes are now being bought by Londoners and the home counties chaps as second homes for the summer and lay idle for 8/9 months, even Grimsby is holding a " local referendum " on local housing for local people.......non binding of course.

We haven't gone that far yet but that doesn't mean it won't happen, look at Wexford town, full of 2 up 2 down with enough garden to extend the prices are very high, my wife is from one of those and we sold her mother's 18 years for a pittance in comparison.

We can't keep throwing money at this and see no improvement and sometimes it takes courage to say " well that's a bust" and go back and try again.
 
Last edited:
Look at the figures for uncollected rents and debts in Dublin City council in the region of 30 - 40 million euros. The councils ran away from it for a reason and were only too happy to have a burden taken off them via HAP and private landlords, dealing with tenants and expensive maintenance of older housing stock.
 
That is why rent should be garnished.
 
To my knowledge the government passed legislation ten years ago to allow coincils to deduct rents from social welfare benefits but it was never commenced.
 
Mocame said:
To my knowledge the government passed legislation ten years ago to allow coincils to deduct rents from social welfare benefits but it was never commenced.
Click to expand...

Yes, that it is absolutely correct – section 53 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014, which provides for the deduction of rent at source from welfare entitlements.

However, you can see from this that the Housing Minister has not enacted section 53.
 
Last edited:
Wow another tentacle of the mess appears. 10% of household income and you can bet your bottom dollar " household income " is probably understated.

I'll wager that nobody will be turfed out on the street even if they are told to repay the arrears itll be reset with €5 more to cover the arrears..
 
From Social Justice Ireland

"Social Housing
While the targets for overall housing provision are based on future demand only as underpinned by research, the targets for social housing don’t appear have any foundation at all. Housing for All commits to delivering 90,000 social homes by 2030, with an average of 9,500 new-build social homes per year to 2026.
If the strategy commits to building 47,500 by 2026, with guaranteed funding, how are the remaining 42,500 homes to be delivered? The reality is that almost half of the 90,000 homes will likely be delivered through the private sector using subsidies such as the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) and Rental Accommodation Scheme (RAS).
But are the 90,000 socials homes sufficient? The short answer is no. There are currently 61,880 households on the social housing waiting lists, as of November 2020[5]. A further 59,821 households were in private rented tenancies supported by HAP as at Q4 2020[6]. With a failure rate of 26 per cent, HAP tenancies can hardly be classified as secure or sustainable[7]. Therefore the overall existing need for social housing is 121,701, more than the social housing provision target set out in Housing for All."

The above is a cut and paste from a report issued by Social Justice Ireland issued in January 22.

This is one of a plethora of reports from multiple sources that I have been accumulating, about 21 now, all published in the last 7 years and each contains its own level of bias in the narrative.

Trying to develop a cohesive factual analysis of all this data is way beyond my capabilities, there are more contradictions in the "facts" than a Trump rally, but as we all know it's a mess, its expensive, and based on the strategic plans the government has its never going to be solved.

And its not only due to the political system, it appears our society has developed an uneducated understanding of the issue and only expect solutions eventhough the behaviour of renters both in public and private owned households are simply adding to the abyss. I genuinely believe that a majority of the population believes that social housing should be free whatever the cost.

No political party is going to introduce any policy that is deemed to be pragmatic with all stakeholders needs addressed. They have developed an industry where nothing is solved and salaries are high, and vested interests taken care of. And however frustrating this is to the taxpayer it's not gonna change in my lifetime nor in my children's either.

A modern country we aren't despite the perception we have created by shiny buildings in Dublin, Cork etc we have an attitude that really hasn't changed for hundred of years where moaning and shovelling money at problems is better than solving problems.
 
Last edited:
Social Justice Ireland seem to assume that all of the people on the social housing waiting list and in receipt of HAP want social housing. This isn't the case, or at least they don't want a good deal of the the housing they are offered by councils:

Refusal of Cork housing offers doubles in four years

While the number of properties available for letting by Cork City Council increased last year, there was also a significant increase in the number of refusals last year compared to previous years
www.irishexaminer.com
 
Its not the narrative that Government wants but in reality most of those would like to have their own home.

My sister after divorce was in a HAP rent house, she couldn't wait until she got her albeit, social housing" home ", so yes I think its perfectly logical to include them failing any proper analysis that shows that people on hap are happy renting in such a way.

Edit, yes Cork seems to have an issue with not letting out of social housing, excuses from children getting sea sick because of sea views etc are legendary, but I assure you many are grateful including my sister.

Anyone who refuses should be struck off the list that would soften a cough or two.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register