Housing/Michael D

asdfg87

What's the view on his comments on housing?

Personally i am delighted as i have being saying exactly what he said here for about 5 years, hopefully it will get legs and make a difference.

Sam Russell

Michael D is highlighting a disgraceful failure of public policy pursued by Irish Governments for the last 40 years. The state should be providing subsidised housing for approx 30% of homes, as they used to do by provision of council houses (Local Authority housing or now called social housing).

They do subsidise housing by cash grants given to private landlords with no control over the rents charged other than market forces. There is no attempt to control the rents charged, but they did introduce 'rent pressure zones' which were an attempt to allow those rents to rise by double the then inflation rates, but rents outside these zones could rise as they could. So you control rents by allowing them to rise at twice the inflation rate - is that a serious policy?

The solution to housing is to build more. Now the Irish Glass Bottle site fell into state ownership over a decade ago and still is awaiting a shovel on the site. Now why has it taken so long?

Of course Michael D was correct to call out such a disgrace as housing provision. It is a total failure of public policy in every way. Only the provision of health care beats it.

gladerunner

Now the row is about his ability to speak out ? not the actual problem of housing.

This country does not have a functioning government, they are just sitting idly by. At this stage i think they are trying to implode civic society so that when Sinn Fein get in, it will be a even bigger mess to clean up.

Its shameful that we pay them so much money for such a bad job including even Michael D himself.

whisky_galore

The reaction from ministers and TDs is anger and defensiveness, not "how can we solve this" speaks volumes.

He's dead right, but I don't think it'll make one bit of a difference.

Good loser

Wouldn't have the patience to read his speech in detail. From all I've seen it's the same guff/garbage he's been at for years. It's not appropriate for him to venture into the political field to the extent he has. Don't consider his intervention moves the debate on - in the real world.

There's plenty of goodwill towards housing supply - what's lacking is money, planning approvals, cost of materials, cost and supply of labour etc.

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119213678#Comment_119213678

I think guff is all that's going with regard housing, at least someone with access to airtime is saying it. oddly enough the general population seem to be happy enough.. I thought his intervention may start a new debate but it seems it will not happen. Personally i never thought Local Authorities should have stopped building houses. I think if all the rent allowances and hap payments were put into a housing fund there be money to build houses.

Sam Russell

The reaction of Gov ministers and TDs is to try and shoot the messenger, not tackle the problem.

The solution should start be stopping evictions if the rent is paid, and the tenant is OK (not anti-social). This nonsense of allowing the landlord to evict on the excuse of refurb (painting) or needed by distant relative (unlikely to be true). Empty apartments are left to protect the rents of the others.

Rents should be fixed for, say, three years with the possibility of revue by the Residential Tenancy Board where the landlord (or tenant) feels the rent is out of line with the rents in the immediate locality. Of course the RTB needs more resources, and should be supplemented by the LA. Evictions create homelessness.

Planning issues need to be resolved speedily, and again, this is because objections stop building. Now people can object within the law, but cases take far too long to resolve. More resources and speed needed wherever the delays occur - be it within ABP or the courts.

Actual building will proceed if there are solutions to the above.

RoTelly

I agree with his statement but as President he should not have made it. However, I'd also question the government as to why they are not reading his speeches, I though any statement must be first approved by the government of the day?

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119216201#Comment_119216201

It clear that he "deliberately dropped a clanger" and fair play to him for doing it while all the people who are supposed to work for the people are looking like bold children.

RoTelly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119216464#Comment_119216464

That's up to the opposition and backbench TDs, whether the President likes it or not, or whether I agree with him or not.

There may come a time where I disagree with the president's prevailing view, what then?

Is he also suggesting that the opposition aren't doing enough? Or that successive government (of which he and his party were members of) didn't do enough?

If Backbenchers and Opposition agree with him, then they should move a vote of no confidence in the Minister.

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119216686#Comment_119216686

I think he mentioned last 40 years successive governments have lost their way, they certainly have in the last 25 years and the same party bullishit politics.

I am not a huge fan of michael D but he has shown leadership on this one, sadly missing from daily politics. backbenchers do nothing except look at backs.

Good loser

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119214151#Comment_119214151

Your 'solutions' are fantastical, impractical and would cost a fortune.

• stop evictions.
• rents fixed for three years
• rents reviewed by RTB
• speedy planning.

So are the RTB to do items 1 to 3 , as you imply? The so called 'resources' aka money they would need to police these things coud easily come to €1bn per annum. Why not use that money to get more houses built?

They were discussing housing on radio a few weeks ago. Someone ( surely a socialist) wanted the LA to build more houses. Then they moved on to the vacant sites levy, which the LA collects. They collect a pittance it seems because they need 'more resources' Someone then pointed out how absurd it was to expect the LA to build more houses when they didn't have enough 'resources' to collect a vacant sites levy (2 or 3 staff).

touts

Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese both were campaigning presidents who took a lead on issues often speaking out on topics that were uncomfortable for the government.

In contrast Michael D has done little or nothing for his two terms in the Aras. He is right on this issue but I hope one speech does not mean he is falsely remembered as a great president. He has been a waste of space for most of the last 10 years and set the presidency back 40 years to the old party man sitting in the Park waiting to be told whose hand to shake.

Good loser

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119213993#Comment_119213993

LA's stopped building houses for a very, very good reason. Any idea what that reason was?

If the rent allowances/HAP payments were stopped (to put into that fund) what would all the tenants in the country do for housing?

If this' fund' supplied €1 bn per annum. And the LA were to build the houses as you suggest they would do about 2000 houses per annum after a lead-in time of 3 to 4 years. If they were to BUY houses they could probably get 4000 per annum from year 1.

Secret: LA's stopped building houses because it was much much cheaper to BUY them.

Sam Russell

I think 'the Galway tent' and all that went with it might give a better reason why we have a housing problem.

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119217653#Comment_119217653

The LA are competing with the people that elect them to office is a large part of the problem, that is what Michael D said in his speech and i have being saying the exact same for years. Maybe if LA'sallowing free market why do we need all the council staff+council politicians. Add to that the interrnational cuckoo/vulture funds that are allowed buy up all available stock and its easy to see the mess that has happened since the trioka left.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119217939#Comment_119217939

There was a surplus of housing when the tent was at its height.

hotmail.com

The objection process to new developments needs to be weakened to speed up new builds.

Local estates holding up new large developments inside the M50 almost on a daily basis.

People want new housing, but not near them. It's beyond a joke at this stage.

Even Pat Kenny objected to a new apartment block in Dalkey because he thought it would damage the beauty of Dalkey. Christ.

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119218875#Comment_119218875

There be a big saving there as would cut the planning personell in half.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119218466#Comment_119218466

'There was a surplus of housing when the tent was at its height.'

The 'Galway tent' was not about building more houses. It was more about donors getting the ear of ministers and influencing housing policy. It is no coincidence that council house building stopped in the 1980s, and the provision of housing support moved away from LA control. It also allowed a huge amount of rezoning and PP given for inappropriate housing, some of which was bulldozed after the financial crash.

I have heard an estimate that 30% of households need subsidised housing, and if that figure is accepted, then social housing is a necessity in society. The subsidy is currently provided in the HAP payments that contribute to excessive rents to landlords.

This is what Michael D was talking about - an absolute dereliction of successive Gov responsibility and failure of public policy - which could be considered deliberate by successive parties in the pursuit of votes.

Gant21

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119217631#Comment_119217631

All he has done successfully in the aras is eat the finest of food. Very evident of his fine condition, the man can’t walk just waddle.

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119216201#Comment_119216201

Every formal address or message "to the nation" or to either or both Houses of the Oireachtas must have prior approval of the government.[24] Other than on these two (quite rare) occasions, there is no limitation on the president's right to speak. 

However

by convention presidents refrain from direct criticism of the government.

David Kenny, associate professor of law at Trinity College Dublin, said while there is no strict constitutional rule that prohibits the president from commenting on issues, there was a long precedent whereby there would be a line between what a president would or would not say.

“ it’s generally considered that the president wouldn’t weigh in on matters of active political controversy or be seen to criticise government policy and performance,” he said.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40895594.html

So when it comes to presidents speaking out outside the context of 'formal addresses' we get into the murky territory of 'convention' and 'precedent'. While MDH may not be breaking any specific rules by weighing in on a 'hot' political issue like housing, to me he's definitely contravening the vision of the role set out in the constitution.

IMO Garret Fitzgerald had a true understanding of how the president should conduct himself when he said he turned down offers to run for the post because he "didn't want to spend seven years saying only anodyne things."

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119218939#Comment_119218939

The Galway tent was shower of gobshites thinking how great they were, i was in it once (work) at the time i did not reaslize what is happening.

I actually blame the people on this on to a certain extent, it has been well flagged for the last 5/6 years cuckoo/vulture funds buying up available housing including whole developments, one bought from NAMA a Government agency, why were people not protesting on the streets like what is happing this weekend. My sister sold a house and after it was sold she realized it was a fund, got 40k more than expected.

We get what we deserve.

Sam Russell

The cuckoo funds and vulture funds could all be tackled if the Gov were minded to, but they are not. Taxation is one way.

Evictions cause homelessness, and also create pressure on available properties which puts upward pressure on rents. Prevent evictions would alleviate this. If the property has to be sold, then it should sell with the tenant unaffected.

Rent freeze, with RTB allowed to adjust rent up or down if it is out of line.

They built Ballyfermot, Finglas and Ballymun when we were broke, plus many more council estates. Why can that not be done now? Have they forgotten how to do it?

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119219891#Comment_119219891

Its up to to insist that they do it but the media and the developers lobby have control of this one. The only chance is we have a crash and all of these funds get caught which is very likely. If it wasnt for the multinationals we be broke , i said here a few weeks ago a friend who's daughter teaches in Dublin told me recently that her accommodation not really much better than where he was staying nearly 50 years ago apart she has own room.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119219891#Comment_119219891

What is meant by "cuckoo and vulture funds"?

Does it mean REITs?

Or does it refer to foreign pension funds buying apartment blocks here?

Vulture funds usually buy loan books, not houses, as far as I know.

Sam Russell

I am referring to any company that buys up estates of houses built for owner occupiers. There are few enough houses in the supply chain without LAs and these companies removing stock from the market.

Good loser

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119224444#Comment_119224444

As well as new houses buyers have thousands of old housing stock they can bid on. Builders should be allowed sell to the highest bidder in the market; it is they who have taken all the risks to do the development. Why should the market be skewed to favour the purchasers; if the sellers make more profit they will continue in the business and increase supply. THat is the function of a market.

Rjd2

https://twitter.com/angiebeeb/status/1537369279049392130

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119219891#Comment_119219891

FF and FG sadly are in the pockets of the vulture funds and as they know their goose is cooked for the next election, no point in falling out with them just to help out the unwashed masses who will largely vote SF next time.

Its happening everywhere not just Ireland that vulture funds are doing this sadly and I don't see enough pushback. A lot of governments such as ours still believe that the free market solves everything and it will all work out. Drivel.

https://twitter.com/angiebeeb/status/1537369279049392130

asdfg87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119225374#Comment_119225374

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/government-must-restrict-cuckoo-funds-buying-up-entire-estates-1.3857259

This has being happening for years.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119225610#Comment_119225610

True sadly. Asking FF/FG to do anything about it is as pointless as the Utd fans on twitter asking the Glazers to stop been leaches sadly.

Any day now maybe they will have a change of heart......😒

72sheep

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119205073#Comment_119205073

Yes. It speaks volumes that our apolitical President feels the need to speak out on this. Our housing situation is to the eternal shame of FFG. After all, their trusted economics commentators (hello Daniel O'Brien) keep telling us we're a wealthy country. In addition, the (alleged) brazen going's on's at An Bord Pleanala beggar belief. Hopefully we'll be learning more about that soon :-)

Very well done Michael D.