FG councillors react with anger and distress at plans for social housing in Cork.

Weltsmertz

FG councillors Des Cahill and Cllr Joe Kavanagh are outraged at plans to provide 54 social houses in Cork and promised to lead opposition to the proposal. Cllr Cahill told a public meeting. "FG will be opposing this plan as a party"

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/A-row-has-broken-out-over-plans-for-council-houses-in-Montenotte-bfc5c5c7-ec97-4667-9b14-43de2621e539-ds


In related news payments to private landlords have skyrocketed under FG and are now approaching a billion a year. HAP payments alone have increased for €400,000 a year in 2014 to €423,000,000 in 2019.

Weltsmertz

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Residents-caught-in-the-firing-line-as-FF-and-FG-clash-on-social-housing-plans-in-Montenotte--6fcbe6ab-7e8e-4dd8-8e3d-d19dc94f498f-ds

Martin cleverly seeks to open up policy divide with FG over social housing. Ignoring fact that his party supported the policy for the last few years.

LuasSimon

I hope there’s room for horses as well for residents of these 54 social houses in montenotte.
About time montenotte got some culture !

JeffKenna

LuasSimon wrote: »

I hope there’s room for horses as well for residents of these 54 social houses in montenotte.
About time montenotte got some culture !

Don't be silly, the horses live in the house not the residents

Red_Wake

He'd have my vote if I was local.

I wouldn't want to live near some social housing sink estate.

SafeSurfer

Where does it mention anything about horses? A government party in the midst of a housing crisis objecting to housing on ideological grounds says much about their ideology.

SafeSurfer

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Where does it mention anything about horses? A government party in the midst of a housing crisis objecting to housing on ideological grounds says much about their ideology.

There is a rank stench of hypocrisy, considering Noonan cosied up to vulture fund managers not long ago...effectively presiding over eviction of families from their homes.

"Vultures, you know, carry out a very good service in the ecology."

Weltsmertz

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Where does it mention anything about horses? A government party in the midst of a housing crisis objecting to housing on ideological grounds says much about their ideology.

Ironic thing is there are already lots of people with a social housing need living in Montenotte. But they are living in private rental accomadation and their landlords are getting large financial transfers.
It says everything about FGs ideology and why their is a housing crisis.
They are fundamentaly opposed to social housing.

padd b1975

Weltsmertz wrote: »

Ironic thing is there are already lots of people with a social housing need living in Montenotte. But they are living in private rental accomadation and their landlords are getting large financial transfers.
It says everything about FGs ideology and why their is a housing crisis.
They are fundamentaly opposed to social housing.

Montenotte!!

Monocles being dropped all over the place at the prospect.

Snow Garden

The landlords of Ireland are gouging everyone these days, including the taxpayer.
Demand and supply I guess.

Ha Long Bay

Snow Garden wrote: »

The landlords of Ireland are gouging everyone these days, including the taxpayer.
Demand and supply I guess.

Lovely sound bite but are landlords not also taxpayers?

SafeSurfer

Weltsmertz wrote: »

Ironic thing is there are already lots of people with a social housing need living in Montenotte. But they are living in private rental accomadation and their landlords are getting large financial transfers.
It says everything about FGs ideology and why their is a housing crisis.
They are fundamentaly opposed to social housing.

It is hardly surprising when one thinks of the attitude to ordinary Irish people by Fine Gaels founding fathers.


“People reared in workhouses, as you are aware, are no great acquisition to the community and they have no ideas whatsoever of civic responsibilities. As a rule their highest aim is to live at the expense of the ratepayers. Consequently, it would be a decided gain if they all took it into their heads to emigrate. “

WT Cosgrave

emo72

423 million in hap payments. a year?
how high can that go? I'd rather build public houses with that money instead. maybe im old fashioned.

Weltsmertz

emo72 wrote: »

423 million in hap payments. a year?
how high can that go? I'd rather build public houses with that money instead. maybe im old fashioned.

If you count all the financial transfers to landlords from that and other schemes it is now closer to €900 million a year. That would build an awful lot of social housing.
And it would still be there next year.
The €900 million to landlords is "dead money"

SafeSurfer

john4321 wrote: »

Lovely sound bite but are landlords not also taxpayers?

Not when they have been allowed to avoid paying tax through the use of Fine Gael introduced 110 special purpose vehicles.

Weltsmertz

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Not when they have been allowed to avoid paying tax through the use of Fine Gael introduced 110 special purpose vehicles.

Good job we are not in the Accommodation forum. We would all be banned by the landlord mods.

Ha Long Bay

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Not when they have been allowed to avoid paying tax through the use of Fine Gael introduced 110 special purpose vehicles.

Not a landlord myself so can you explain how a landlord renting out a single property can avoid paying tax on the income?

SafeSurfer

john4321 wrote: »

Not a landlord myself so can you explain how a landlord renting out a single property can avoid paying tax on the income?

These mechanisms are available to the large institutional investors known as vulture funds. Not to mere individual plebs.

Ha Long Bay

SafeSurfer wrote: »

These mechanisms are available to the large institutional investors known as vulture funds. Not to mere individual plebs.

The original poster said

"The landlords of Ireland are gouging everyone these days"

That's why I asked the original question. Not sure why you chose to call private landlords plebs.

Salary Negotiator

Weltsmertz wrote: »

If you count all the financial transfers to landlords from that and other schemes it is now closer to €900 million a year. That would build an awful lot of social housing.
And it would still be there next year.
The €900 million to landlords is "dead money"

How much of that €900m is taken back in tax?

What would it cost to build and maintain houses for the amount of people covered by HAP and similar payments?

We obviously need more social housing built but when so many social tenant are in arrears I can understand the reluctance to do so.

Weltsmertz

SafeSurfer wrote: »

These mechanisms are available to the large institutional investors known as vulture funds. Not to mere individual plebs.

Lots of vulture funds receive HAP payments.

However many of the over 20,000 landlords that get HAP payments avail of increased tax relief e.g. 100% relief on their mortgage interest, as an expense against rental income or many other tax avoidance mechanisms designed to assist landlords avoid tax on HAP

SafeSurfer

john4321 wrote: »

The original poster said

"The landlords of Ireland are gouging everyone these days"

That's why I asked the original question. Not sure why you chose to call private landlords plebs.

Pleb

an ordinary person, especially one from the lower social classes.

Ha Long Bay

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Pleb

an ordinary person, especially one from the lower social classes.

I'm aware on how to use Google but thanks for posting the definition of the word. I asked why you chose to describe normal landlords as plebs.

SafeSurfer

john4321 wrote: »

I'm aware on how to use Google but thanks for posting the definition of the word. I asked why you chose to describe normal landlords as plebs.

Because ordinary landlords are being treated differently to larger, more powerful landlords. One could say treated differently to a patrician landlord class.

Ha Long Bay

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Because ordinary landlords are being treated differently to larger, more powerful landlords. One could say treated differently to a patrician landlord class.

Again nothing to do with my original question to the other poster but can I ask do you have a pension? If so have you specified that you don't want the fund invested in property.

SafeSurfer

john4321 wrote: »

Again nothing to do with my original question to the other poster but can I ask do you have a pension? If so have you specified that you don't want the fund invested in property.

No. I don’t have a pension.

Ush1

SafeSurfer wrote: »

These mechanisms are available to the large institutional investors known as vulture funds. Not to mere individual plebs.

Don't they make up a tiny amount of landlords in Ireland?

SafeSurfer

Ush1 wrote: »

Don't they make up a tiny amount of landlords in Ireland?

One fund of many owns 2,500 units in Dublin alone. Hardly tiny by any stretch.

fonecrusher1

In fairness if they're going to build social housing there should be adequate accommodation for d'horses too though.

Ush1

SafeSurfer wrote: »

One fund of many owns 2,500 units in Dublin alone. Hardly tiny by any stretch.

That is tiny. I'll try find the statistic but I think something like 70 percent of Irish landlords own 5 properties or less.

"Vulture" funds are a small player, especially in residential.

EDIT:

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/more-landlords-have-multiple-properties-897316.html

"Landlords who own two properties still account for the vast majority of multiple property owners. There are 122,900 individuals registered as having two properties liable for LPT, representing 69% of all landlords with investment properties."

SafeSurfer

Ush1 wrote: »

That is tiny. I'll try find the statistic but I think something like 70 percent of Irish landlords own 5 properties or less.

"Vulture" funds are a small player, especially in residential.

EDIT:

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/more-landlords-have-multiple-properties-897316.html

"Landlords who own two properties still account for the vast majority of multiple property owners. There are 122,900 individuals registered as having two properties liable for LPT, representing 69% of all landlords with investment properties."

The amount of tax sheltered rent which the vulture funds generate is obviously much higher than the equivalent number of ordinary landlords because of the number of units they control. So saying that 69% of landlords own 2 properties tells us little about the amount of units owned by vulture funds.

Andreas77

my penis is dripping when I think of how well I would live as a landlord, skimming, raising the rent, walking into other peoples homes to inspect, pulling up the blinds and leaning on the window sill like I own the place, toby, ah ha, toby toby, the slats in the bed are broken , you did too much bonking, Tony time to dust down the paperbacks, place your tongue under my testicles, william. The rent is going up by fifteen pounds

SafeSurfer

Andreas77 wrote: »

my penis is dripping when I think of how well I would live as a landlord, skimming, raising the rent, walking into other peoples homes to inspect, pulling up the blinds and leaning on the window sill like I own the place, toby, ah ha, toby toby, the slats in the bed are broken , you did too much bonking, Tony time to dust down the paperbacks, place your tongue under my testicles, william. The rent is going up by fifteen pounds

Ah yes Stumpet City. A much underrated classic.

andekwarhola

I see sheep wrote: »

Private landlords are scum

Despite the fact that - in the absence of any coherent and equitable social housing policy from local authorities and the goverment - private landlords provide housing for many tenants that can't afford to buy a house.

KerranJast

padd b1975 wrote: »

Montenotte!!

Monocles being dropped all over the place at the prospect.

TBF its down towards the Garda station so basically Mayfield.

Pretty ordinary people living in the area.

People are pretty pissed locally because it was given planning for 40 odd private houses with a mix of some social housing but for some reason the Council have decided to block convert the whole lot to social housing.

Best guess is the developer is pushing for a once off payment from the Council (effectively the Government) rather than houses being sold on the market 1 by 1.

There's a huge shortage of private housing and room to build new housing in the area.

Also a lot of close to retirement people who were hoping it'd entice their kids to stay close.

Like most news articles these days the clickbait headline doesn't give the full picture.

Andreas77

andekwarhola wrote: »

Despite the fact that - in the absence of any coherent and equitable social housing policy from local authorities and the goverment - private landlords provide housing for many tenants that can't afford to buy a house.

They shouldn't be allowed to own a property for rental in the first place. Nobody should be allowed to own more than twice as much as anyone else.

padd b1975

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It is hardly surprising when one thinks of the attitude to ordinary Irish people by Fine Gaels founding fathers.


“People reared in workhouses, as you are aware, are no great acquisition to the community and they have no ideas whatsoever of civic responsibilities. As a rule their highest aim is to live at the expense of the ratepayers. Consequently, it would be a decided gain if they all took it into their heads to emigrate. “

WT Cosgrave

Brian Lenihan Snr. said something similar many years ago.

Something along the lines of "We need a few million to emigrate just to give the country a chance of working".

SafeSurfer

padd b1975 wrote: »

Brian Lenihan Snr. said something similar many years ago.

Something along the lines of "We need a few million to emigrate just to give the country a chance of working".

What he said was “We can’t all live on a small island”.

Raconteuse

andekwarhola wrote: »

Despite the fact that - in the absence of any coherent and equitable social housing policy from local authorities and the goverment - private landlords provide housing for many tenants that can't afford to buy a house.

Fair play for having the patience to try and reason with such shyte.

padd b1975

SafeSurfer wrote: »

What he said was “We can’t all live on a small island”.

He was right whatever way he said it.

Edgware

padd b1975 wrote: »

Montenotte!!

Monocles being dropped all over the place at the prospect.

Not to mention good port being spilt on the carpet

Raconteuse

Montesnotty was usurped long ago by Rochestown.

Mad_maxx

Riskymove wrote: »

yes

currently approx. 14% for pre 2013 entrants as well as PRSI/USC as State pension is "incorporated into the pension"

those since 2013 are on the Single Scheme which is a more complicated pension based on average yearly income

Deleted User wrote: »

There is a rank stench of hypocrisy, considering Noonan cosied up to vulture fund managers not long ago...effectively presiding over eviction of families from their homes.

"Vultures, you know, carry out a very good service in the ecology."

Unless you're a hardcore p1ss take merchant, you won't loose your home to a bank in this country, the scandal is that they don't repossess near enough

Mad_maxx

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

How much of that €900m is taken back in tax?

What would it cost to build and maintain houses for the amount of people covered by HAP and similar payments?

We obviously need more social housing built but when so many social tenant are in arrears I can understand the reluctance to do so.

A third of local authority tenants are in arrears despite the very modest rent charged, do they face eviction?, no chance

HAP is the cheaper option for the state, councils have no interest in being in the business of maintaining properties for people who respect nothing

LuasSimon

Weltsmertz wrote: »

Ironic thing is there are already lots of people with a social housing need living in Montenotte. But they are living in private rental accomadation and their landlords are getting large financial transfers.
It says everything about FGs ideology and why their is a housing crisis.
They are fundamentaly opposed to social housing.

This doesn’t tally with their soft on traveller crime approach or giving travellers special status . Like a lot of the PC brigade travellers are great people until they move in to your area . People in rural Ireland have been terrorized for years , let montenotte get their share as well .

suicide_circus

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

We obviously need more social housing built but when so many social tenant are in arrears I can understand the reluctance to do so.

the arrears of current social housing tenants is very nearly as important an issue as building more social housing.

there HAS to be consequences for not paying your absolutely tiny social housing rent. why they cant stop it at source i dont understand.

Mad_maxx

suicide_circus wrote: »

the arrears of current social housing tenants is very nearly as important an issue as building more social housing.

there HAS to be consequences for not paying your absolutely tiny social housing rent. why they cant stop it at source i dont understand.

You won't see an rte prime time special on that

jay0109

Weltsmertz wrote: »

If you count all the financial transfers to landlords from that and other schemes it is now closer to €900 million a year. That would build an awful lot of social housing.
And it would still be there next year.
The €900 million to landlords is "dead money"

When I read of the tens of millions in rental arrears in local authority housing and the inability to get/seek evictions, then I can clearly see why any Govt would want to pass the social housing risk for on to the private sector

Salary Negotiator

suicide_circus wrote: »

the arrears of current social housing tenants is very nearly as important an issue as building more social housing.

there HAS to be consequences for not paying your absolutely tiny social housing rent. why they cant stop it at source i dont understand.

Agreed, it’s outrageous that people are falling behind on their rent. It’s obvious a certain cohort have decided to prioritise other spending over rent, safe in the knowledge that there’ll be no repercussions.

Deduct it at source and change the law to make evictions easier if the tenant refuses to engage with the local authority or landlord.

Added bonus is that it’ll free up some housing stock for those in emergency accommodation. Won’t make a difference to the actual number of people “homeless” but I’d say anyone coming out of emergency accommodation will make bloody sure their rent is paid to avoid going back.

Weltsmertz

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

Agreed, it’s outrageous that people are falling behind on their rent. It’s obvious a certain cohort have decided to prioritise other spending over rent, safe in the knowledge that there’ll be no repercussions.

It's outrageous that a certain political party are not providing social housing.
It’s obvious a certain cohort have decided to prioritise giving nearly a billion Euro a year to their landlord friends, safe in the knowledge that there’ll be no repercussions.

SafeSurfer

suicide_circus wrote: »

the arrears of current social housing tenants is very nearly as important an issue as building more social housing.

there HAS to be consequences for not paying your absolutely tiny social housing rent. why they cant stop it at source i dont understand.

So what happens when people are evicted from social housing for non payment of rent? They are either turfed out on the street or housed in emergency accommodation only to go back on the housing list.

For some people, using the rent money to pay other bills is the only access to credit they have.