efanton wrote: » So where are FG and FF going to build their social houses and affordable homes? Are they going to buy green field sites so that they can hoard perfectly good for building homes? What Eoin Ó Broin has put forward makes so much sense. I personally dont care whether it is SF that gets to build them when they are in government, or FF/FG build them if they actually can get a government formed. 100+ days now and still no government, and FG were bleating that SF could not form a government in the first week. How ironic. The important thing for me personally, is that the housing crisis is addressed and this scheme helps those who need to avail of social housing and also those young couples who have been priced out of the property market. Like Eoin Ó Broin has said he has done Eoghan Murphy's job for him because that guy hasnt got a clue, he couldn't run a sweet shop let alone a government department. If I was Eoghan Murphy I wouldn't be looking a gift horse in the mouth. I would be working away developing this plan, so that if a FF/FG government is formed he can get to work straight away implementing it.
Bishop of hope wrote: » As I said, nothing wrong with the plan, but tell the true cost. Any sites used up will have to be replaced, for this policy to work sites will have to be provided to replace what's there now.
Bishop of hope wrote: » The big stick like, a true FG policy there. We all know why these sites were left vacant, because there wasn't money to build on them. But now that there's a chance, when the mess is, finally sorted, then in rides the knights in shining armour on their bmxs. But suddenly there's a new crisis, the promises ring hollow again. The true cost of building is beginning to dawn on SF, their estimates are well up on their election estimates, but that doesent matter either, sure the land is there anyway. That's OK for now, but what about future needs, the land bank has to be replaced, but to get it cheap, we will blackmail the landowners. All the while not giving a thought to those who can't go down that route in the first place or don't qualify for this affordable housing, fcuk them. Their taxes bought the land we have, will buy up what more we need and they can keep the developers happy. Be honest at least, the true cost to the taxpayer is probably €70000 euro site costs + €230000 build cost, hardly a, saving of 100000. Factor in the benefits to workers directly employed re pensions and holiday entitlements, you're back virtually to square 1.
efanton wrote: » So what would be your alternative?
Brendan Bendar wrote: » There’s little point arguing about ‘affordable housing’ when a bill of 37mil for the cheapest rent in the country commensurate with income is left unpaid. Why not start there.
Bishop of hope wrote: » In the grand scheme of things, that's 120 houses or so. Hardly a dent in the problem is it.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » What problem?
efanton wrote: » I agree. But believe it not most of that debt is from tenants who are in full time employment. As for those on social welfare for most that is automatically deducted from their benefit BEFORE they withdraw it from the post office or it goes into their bank account. But whether it is those on social welfare, or those working it seems crazy not to have automatic deductions from wages or benefit. For those on social welfare they simply have to sign a form available from the post office, and for those working it would be relatively simple to modify their tax allowances. Virtually every housing association collect their rents this way, so why are the county councils and city councils not doing it as well.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Have you a link to most of that debt is from people in full time employment?
A total of 17,775 tenants are behind on their rent, owing a cumulative total of €33.5 million. Just under €15 million was owed by the council’s best-paid tenants – those with household incomes of more than €800 a week. High income “The lower-income households account for the smallest percentage of the arrears,” Rose Kenny executive manager of the council’s housing department said. “When you take €800-plus as something we would call a high income, and that includes subsidiary earners in a household, they account for over 44 per cent of the outstanding arrears.” The 25 tenants who have allowed their debts to exceed €27,000 were in this higher-earning bracket, she said.
efanton wrote: » It was in the news article that I am sure Brendan Bendar is refereing too. About a month ago there was a big story about Dublin City Council having 33 million in unpaid rent, built up over a number of yearshttps://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/top-earning-city-council-tenants-most-likely-to-default-on-rent-1.4106254
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Lol you said most are in full time employment!! Did you read the article?
efanton wrote: » I did read that in another article, actually trying to find that at the moment. I cant say that's 100% true, but that was certainly what was reported. Are you jumping to conclusions and suggesting that's it only those on social welfare that are refusing to pay their rents? Have you any evidence this is the case? Anyhow what's you point? We both agree there's no need for these arrears to ever build up, they are easily avoided if the county councils would actually do something about it by imposing automatic deductions. If there is a need for legislation then why hasn't Eoghan Murphy or the government done something about it? I assume they were well aware of this arrears issue well before the papers go hold of it..
Bishop of hope wrote: » Anyway, they're all talking about it, promising big on it, the politicians that is, the lads looking to be in Govt, the electorate prior to the election and still. There must be a problem with it somewhere?
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » I didn't imply anything you did:) I asked you for a link and you can't provide it. That's about it really.
efanton wrote: » Even without the article (that I am still trying to find) do you not think that its reasonable to assume that many people who are working have not paid their rents, along with many who are on social welfare. We are talking about council rents here so there's no HAP involved, and there wouldn't be a large number of households that are getting more than €800 per week from social welfare. Remember too that child benefit is not used by councils to access income. So the reality is that you would need a household of at least 4 people all claiming some form of unemployment benefit, pension or disability benefit. While I am sure this occurs, there's certainly not 17,000 households that would meet that criteria in just the area served by Dublin City Council.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Of course there is. Its ridiculous and every party knows it. Handing out 100,000 houses to people for 40 euro a week is bonkers and never financially viable.
Bishop of hope wrote: » Which party is doing that? SF are talking 700 to 900, where is, the 40 coming from?
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » I dunno. That's why I asked for some information about what you claim. Its OK you don't have it so we move on.https://rebuildingireland.ie/news/annual-summary-of-social-housing-assessments-is-published/ Before we do. Just a link to show the majority in social housing are unemployed.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » They are proposing social housing tenants pay 700-900 a month? Is that not affordable housing?
Bishop of hope wrote: » Yes it is, thats the housing I'm talking about too. Social housing could run on the same principle. Local authorities could charge reasonable rents subsidised by the exchequer, they're doing it to private landlords anyway. No local authority should have to provide housing at 40 a week.
Leo Varadkar, Micheál Martin and Eamon Ryan are to meet to try and overcome major obstacles encountered in talks between the parties seeking to form a government. Issues relating to housing, the pension age, Direct Provision and the country’s roads are among the major stumbling blocks between the parties who cannot agree.
The Green Party is seeking to “gut entirely” the country’s road budget but this is being sharply resisted by Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil in talks aimed at forming a government.
There have been sharp clashes between Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil with resentment building that Micheál Martin’s team have sided with the Greens on issues.
The parties will for the first time today grapple with the highly contentious area of agriculture, amid commitments to reduce carbon emissions by 7% a year.
RandomViewer wrote: » Lot of houses at those rents are what's known as SI houses, tenant provided the site
