'Dublin City Council’s social housing output to halve'

gaiscioch

Words fail me, but I'll try. This story has just popped up on The Irish Times in the past hour.

Dublin City Council’s social housing output to halve

"The number of permanent social homes due to be provided in Dublin city this year is set drop by more than half on 2015, according to new figures from Dublin City Council.
The Government’s social housing strategy gives the council a target of providing 3,347 homes in a three year period up to the end of 2017, though a combination of building, buying, refurbishment, and rental arrangements, with a budget of €292 million.
In 2015 this resulted in 1,689 homes being added to the social housing stock in the city, but by the end of 2016, this figure is expected to reach just over 700."

This initial figure is, without question, ridiculously inadequate (Conor Skehan estimates Dublin is short 35,000 homes). That they are only going to build half the number of homes (i.e. mostly apartments) that they built last year defies credibility. Every day I deal with kids who are homeless and I see the destruction of trust, among much else, that it causes. I've seen kids go from on the margins (nearly always due to alcoholism) to homelessness in the form of a succession of emergency accommodation and interventions by social workers to foster the children out. The change has moved all my colleagues. The self-esteem you're trying to build up in the kids is shattered and their priorities are naturally no longer on the one thing which will give them freedom, their education. As far as I'm concerned the media is not reflecting the extent of this problem, and it appears that despite the tragic stories like that of Jonathan Corrie outside the Dáil, Dublin City Council's 63 elected councillors (the vast majority of whom describe themselves as left-wing) do not actually care enough to break the mould here and make the provision of homes the priority.

What does it take for people in power at national and local level to get serious about this? I've just contacted 3 of my local councillors looking for answers. I don't know what it takes before they'll stop waffling and do something serious to tackle this.


Full list of Dublin City Councillors

Charles Babbage

This is the fault of the councillors to some extent, and those who voted to reduce the property tax on people who have homes showed little interest in those who have none.

However, the housing crisis is not just a function of actions this year but of the actions of a period of time. During the recession the authorities should have prepared plans and been ready to go with housing schemes with minimum delay when funds become available. Instead no planning was done and local authority architect offices were run down to the minimum possible. Since these things cannot be turned around instantaneously, there is now a crisis. Labour in the previous government had no interest in planning for the housing needs, preferring to emphasise projects such as undermining marriage.

Tabnabs

Populist politics from the majority party on the Council means has lead to this situation developing. They want to make the easy decisions and not have to make unpopular decisions like not reduce the LPT. It looks like that will backfire spectacularly.

Sinn Féin 16
Fianna Fáil 9
Fine Gael 8
Labour Party 8
People Before Profit 5
Green Party 3
Anti-Austerity Alliance 1
United Left 1
Independent 12

12Phase

You seriously couldn't make it up!

All talk, no action on this problem and it's heading towards being a really serious crisis.

hqd

Still baffles me that bar applicants with medical conditions, elderly applicants and certain welfare issues that social housing is given over for life.

All housing should be given over for a set period of years so applicants can get back on their feet and not for a full lifetime. This is one of the main issues for council properties not being returned as its passed down from generation to generation which obviously leads to a decrease in stock available to let.

In that way councils could be more reliant on the private rented sector and not solely on building properties

odyssey06

Are you sure LPT is even meant to be directed towards provision of social housing?
I would not have classed social housing as a 'local service' in the same category as "public parks; libraries; open spaces and leisure amenities; planning and development; fire and emergency services; maintenance and cleaning of streets; and street lighting."

I would have considered planning and development here to be oversight and co-ordination of planning permission, development plans etc not actual building.

Something strikes me as wrong that the provision of homes is a fiscal responsibility of DCC and not central government?

Also, it would be interesting to have an assessment of the value of the DCC housing stock in D1 and D2 and I think questions have to be asked whether it would make more sense to increase the quantity of stock by selling off properties in high value areas.

newacc2015

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This is the fault of the councillors to some extent, and those who voted to reduce the property tax on people who have homes showed little interest in those who have none.

However, the housing crisis is not just a function of actions this year but of the actions of a period of time. During the recession the authorities should have prepared plans and been ready to go with housing schemes with minimum delay when funds become available. Instead no planning was done and local authority architect offices were run down to the minimum possible. Since these things cannot be turned around instantaneously, there is now a crisis. Labour in the previous government had no interest in planning for the housing needs, preferring to emphasise projects such as undermining marriage.

I dont blame the councillors for cutting LPT. 15% of DCC LPT is going to fund a general local authority fund. Why is 15% of Dublins LPT going to fund rural CoCos, when the city so badly needs it? Modest homes in DCC are paying more LPT than mansions on glorified driveways aka regional roads funded by the tax payer. Why should a Dubliner pay more LPT for their 2 bed terrace house than someone with a mansion in Kerry?

Where as these funds going to come from that you are talking about? If there is no private housing being built in DCC, there is no funds being collected. Where is the money to fund public housing going to come from? The Government is not funding it.

Paulzx

odyssey06 wrote: »

Are you sure LPT is even meant to be directed towards provision of social housing?
I would not have classed social housing as a 'local service' in the same category as "public parks; libraries; open spaces and leisure amenities; planning and development; fire and emergency services; maintenance and cleaning of streets; and street lighting."

The spin that LPT is for "local services" alone is nonsense.

When local authorities began to receive LPT there was a corresponding decrease in central government funding to local authorities. LPT is used by local authorites to fund whatever they need to spend money on.

The "local servcies" **** was just another buzzword to make it more palatable to add another form of taxation to us thicks that work and pay our taxes correctly

Confucius say

It seems like a lot of the inner city residents get to live there generation after generation without ever even thinking about working and somehow have a claim to these properties. Would it not be better to move these people who contribute nothing to society to somewhere in M50 land or beyond, and develop those areas into areas where the working people can live? It would regenerate the city centre too.

newacc2015

Confucius say wrote: »

It seems like a lot of the inner city residents get to live there generation after generation without ever even thinking about working and somehow have a claim to these properties. Would it not be better to move these people who contribute nothing to society to somewhere in M50 land or beyond, and develop those areas into areas where the working people can live? It would regenerate the city centre too.

The US does this by having a proper property tax system. As the 'hood' gets gentrified, the property taxes increase and eventually people to move affordable areas where the property tax is less. If LPT was around 0.6% like NYC. I seriously doubt you would find much social housing right in the centre of Dublin 2. The DCC council housing is insane in the docklands. You have generic 3 storey DCC housing beside high rise off blocks

cgcsb

The provision of social housing in general has been a disaster. In the 1980s and 1990s terraced houses with front AND back gardens were constructed a mere stones throw from O'Connell St and the IFSC. The rest were banished to commuting from Kildare on non-existent high capacity public transport or live in dark, north facing shoe boxes built by crooked developers. Social housing should be simply 10% of the units in any new development and leave it at that. But of course we're now in crisis because we weren't sensible from the outset.

cgcsb

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This is the fault of the councillors to some extent, and those who voted to reduce the property tax on people who have homes showed little interest in those who have none.

However, the housing crisis is not just a function of actions this year but of the actions of a period of time. During the recession the authorities should have prepared plans and been ready to go with housing schemes with minimum delay when funds become available. Instead no planning was done and local authority architect offices were run down to the minimum possible. Since these things cannot be turned around instantaneously, there is now a crisis. Labour in the previous government had no interest in planning for the housing needs, preferring to emphasise projects such as undermining marriage.

Sure take a dig at the gays, it's all their fault. :rolleyes: muppet.

newacc2015

cgcsb wrote: »

The provision of social housing in general has been a disaster. In the 1980s and 1990s terraced houses with front AND back gardens were constructed a mere stones throw from O'Connell St and the IFSC. The rest were banished to commuting from Kildare on non-existent high capacity public transport or live in dark, north facing shoe boxes built by crooked developers. Social housing should be simply 10% of the units in any new development and leave it at that. But of course we're now in crisis because we weren't sensible from the outset.

DCC hasnt learned from their mistakes. O'Devaney gardens is being redeveloped into houses! Why are they still building house right beside the city? While private developers want to build over 20 storeys in the IFSC.

There is nothing wrong with small apartments. NYC has excellent small apartments. The problem is in Ireland, every apartment has to have an awkward hall, bathroom etc. Instead of single large studio apartment

Mantis Toboggan

Confucius say wrote: »

It seems like a lot of the inner city residents get to live there generation after generation without ever even thinking about working and somehow have a claim to these properties. Would it not be better to move these people who contribute nothing to society to somewhere in M50 land or beyond, and develop those areas into areas where the working people can live? It would regenerate the city centre too.

They have already, look at the parts of clondalkin, blanchardstown or Tallaght. Areas with a high percentage of social housing are already riddled with high levels of crime, drugs and violence.

Phoebas

newacc2015 wrote: »

I dont blame the councillors for cutting LPT. 15% of DCC LPT is going to fund a general local authority fund. Why is 15% of Dublins LPT going to fund rural CoCos, when the city so badly needs it? Modest homes in DCC are paying more LPT than mansions on glorified driveways aka regional roads funded by the tax payer. Why should a Dubliner pay more LPT for their 2 bed terrace house than someone with a mansion in Kerry?

Where as these funds going to come from that you are talking about? If there is no private housing being built in DCC, there is no funds being collected. Where is the money to fund public housing going to come from? The Government is not funding it.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it here.

Local government is government and social housing is in part funded by at local level. So, when councillors vote to cut local taxes, then its inevitable that local services will suffer.

JustTheOne

In a way it's good.

We need to get this idea out of people's heads that you will be given somewhere to live basically free of charge funded by the tax payer for life.

It's a dangerous idea that is becoming the norm. Some people need to see that if you want things in life you have to work for them like the rest of us.

alastair

Paulzx wrote: »

The spin that LPT is for "local services" alone is nonsense.

When local authorities began to receive LPT there was a corresponding decrease in central government funding to local authorities. LPT is used by local authorites to fund whatever they need to spend money on.

The "local servcies" **** was just another buzzword to make it more palatable to add another form of taxation to us thicks that work and pay our taxes correctly

All that local authorities provide/fund are local services. It's no buzzword, it's all that they do.

Confucius say

Tyson Fury wrote: »

They have already, look at the parts of clondalkin, blanchardstown or Tallaght. Areas with a high percentage of social housing are already riddled with high levels of crime, drugs and violence.

Sure yeah. Still though, there are huge duplex houses around the city centre assigned as social housing. Up around St Patrick's Cathedral, off Parnell st, everywhere really. Why have these in the city centre? It's not really fair is it.

L1011

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Labour in the previous government had no interest in planning for the housing needs, preferring to emphasise projects such as undermining marriage.

Sore loser much? Get over it.


During the first three years of the last government there was no immediate housing crisis - rents were falling, there were vacant properties all over the city and half-finished apartment blocks, etc. There also wasn't a cent to spend on social housing.

If you believed the media, and the opposition, at the time we weren't going to need more housing construction as it was all doom and gloom, everyone was emigrating, nobody would ever get a mortgage, etc, etc. Its not a coincidence that the private construction market didn't build much at all during this time despite NAMA completion funding being available, foreign funds willing to invest and only being able to buy commercial property, etc, etc.

Confucius say

L1011 wrote: »

Sore loser much? Get over it.


During the first three years of the last government there was no immediate housing crisis - rents were falling, there were vacant properties all over the city and half-finished apartment blocks, etc. There also wasn't a cent to spend on social housing.

If you believed the media, and the opposition, at the time we weren't going to need more housing construction as it was all doom and gloom, everyone was emigrating, nobody would ever get a mortgage, etc, etc. Its not a coincidence that the private construction market didn't build much at all during this time despite NAMA completion funding being available, foreign funds willing to invest and only being able to buy commercial property, etc, etc.

Not sore at all. I just bought a lovely house near the sea

But I know plenty of people who work hard and are struggling to even pay rent, so I think the system isn't really fair on the middle these days.

L1011

Confucius say wrote: »

Not sore at all. I just bought a lovely house near the sea

It wasn't the housing bit of his rant I was referring to!

Phoebas

Confucius say wrote: »

Not sore at all. I just bought a lovely house near the sea

But I know plenty of people who work hard and are struggling to even pay rent, so I think the system isn't really fair on the middle these days.

Ye poor thing - I suppose you'll just have to make do.

A woman refused a three-storey council house overlooking Cork harbour because she and her children would get sea-sick peering out the window.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/houses-turned-down-for-spurious-reasons-393972.html

newacc2015

Phoebas wrote: »

You're trying to have your cake and eat it here.

Local government is government and social housing is in part funded by at local level. So, when councillors vote to cut local taxes, then its inevitable that local services will suffer.

No I am seeing the bigger picture. For every €1k DCC collects, €150 is going to other CoCo's. Why would DCC leave DCC LPT at the ultra high rates, when it is rural CoCo's who are benefiting the most from it? When LPT is cut local service suffer, but not as much as you think as less is going to rural CoCos.

Do you not see an issue with 15% of DCC revenue going to rural CoCo's? If you are paying €500 in LPT in DCC. €75 of that would benefit DCC at all. We could double LPT in Dublin City tomorrow, but a sizeable amount will just benefit other CoCo's

I would have no issue with a high LPT in Dublin to benefit social housing, if 15% was not going to other CoCo's.

Phoebas

newacc2015 wrote: »

No I am seeing the bigger picture. For every €1k DCC collects, €150 is going to other CoCo's. Why would DCC leave DCC LPT at the ultra high rates, when it is rural CoCo's who are benefiting the most from it? When LPT is cut local service suffer, but not as much as you think as less is going to rural CoCos.

Do you not see an issue with 15% of DCC revenue going to rural CoCo's? If you are paying €500 in LPT in DCC. €75 of that would benefit DCC at all. We could double LPT in Dublin City tomorrow, but a sizeable amount will just benefit other CoCo's

I would have no issue with a high LPT in Dublin to benefit social housing, if 15% was not going to other CoCo's.

That's not 'seeing the bigger picture'. That's just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Dublin cut the LTP by 15%, so for each of those €500 that was being collected, we now collect €425. Instead of €75 going to other CoCos, €63.75 is. Congratulations, that's a sum total of €11.25 that now doesn't go outside the county for each of those €500 LPT bills.

Big picture me arse.

odyssey06

Dublin City Council is expected to collect €77.5 million in Local Property Tax (LPT) in 2016.
DLR is in line for €50 million, South Dublin €20 million and Fingal €24 million.
http://localauthorityfinances.com/about-lpt/

From that the councils have to fund ALL their responsibilities and staff, not just social housing.

Would figures on the order the below really be enough to resolve the social housing crisis in Dublin?
* 15% more if it hadn't reduced its LPT rate
* 20% more if it didn't have to contribute to the national compensatory fund
* At best that's an extra €60 million a year to meet the social housing gap for a population of 1.27 million?

Not a chance when modular homes are costing a quarter of a million a pop even in non prime locations.

I think the big picture is that this needs to be a direct responsibility of central government and long hard looks have to be taken at the whole system of social housing provision and allocation and management of existing stock, as well as the cost of building in levies, taxes and introduction of "use it or lose it" zoning levies.
I think if you look at the current mess the council executives and central government are a much bigger part of the problem and solution than councillors.

newacc2015

Phoebas wrote: »

That's not 'seeing the bigger picture'. That's just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Dublin cut the LTP by 15%, so for each of those €500 that was being collected, we now collect €425. Instead of €75 going to other CoCos, €63.75 is. Congratulations, that's a sum total of €11.25 that now doesn't go outside the county for each of those €500 LPT bills.

Big picture me arse.

So you dont have an issue funding a bloated council in the West, while there is homeless families in Dublin City? Revenue generated in the City, should stay in the City. Most Dubliners are paying more LPT to other councils, they rural residents are paying to their local Coco. That is ridiculous. Do you not think that?

You might be content with paying for excellent roads in Kerry. But as a Dubliners, I dont to be supporting rural CoCo's as much as possible by keeping LPT high like you think we should.

fly_agaric

odyssey06 wrote: »

Would figures on the order the below really be enough to resolve the social housing crisis in Dublin?
* 15% more if it hadn't reduced its LPT rate
* 20% more if it didn't have to contribute to the national compensatory fund
* At best that's an extra €60 million a year to meet the social housing gap for a population of 1.27 million?

Not a chance when modular homes are costing a quarter of a million a pop even in non prime locations.

It doesn't matter. The cut to Dublin LPT is (I think) just a handy stick to beat the council with since various lefties/SF took it over.
If the council was FG/FF/labour run and LPT ws cut it would not merit any mention. In fairness there is a sort of point there though.
You'd expect the left would agree with having a property tax + would not cut it (even if its galling that a large amount of LPT paid went to set up Irish Water and since then a big wedge from it goes to fund rural councils).

Phoebas

newacc2015 wrote: »

So you dont have an issue funding a bloated council in the West, while there is homeless families in Dublin City? Revenue generated in the City, should stay in the City. Most Dubliners are paying more LPT to other councils, they rural residents are paying to their local Coco. That is ridiculous. Do you not think that?

You might be content with paying for excellent roads in Kerry. But as a Dubliners, I dont to be supporting rural CoCo's as much as possible by keeping LPT high like you think we should.

You'd rather that we didn't spend money on homeless families in Dublin as long as those 'bloated' CoCos in the west don't get anything.

Want ketchup with that chip?

gaiscioch

odyssey06 wrote: »

Dublin City Council is expected to collect €77.5 million in Local Property Tax (LPT) in 2016.
DLR is in line for €50 million, South Dublin €20 million and Fingal €24 million.
http://localauthorityfinances.com/about-lpt/

From that the councils have to fund ALL their responsibilities and staff, not just social housing.

Perhaps I'm misreading the above but according to Dublin City Council's website it has a budget of €803 million for 2016 to fund its responsibilities.

Sources of Council Funds:

Sale of goods & services, e.g. rent, parking fees: €280.56 million
Commercial Rates: €320.30 million
Government Grants: €156.34 million
Local Property Tax/GPG: €6.8 million
Net Credit Balance: €27.16 million
Pension Related Deduction €12.40 million

Source

Two things. First, the LPT income at €6.8 million is substantially less than the €77.5 million figure above. Second, it would be interesting to know why the government is giving DCC a grant of €156.34 million, as from the conversation above it would appear DCC is subsidising other councils. However, is DCC not actually making a profit?

L1011

gaiscioch wrote: »

Two things. First, the LPT income at €6.8 million is substantially less than the €77.5 million figure above. Second, it would be interesting to know why the government is giving DCC a grant of €156.34 million, as from the conversation above it would appear DCC is subsidising other councils. However, is DCC not actually making a profit?

"government grant" = the Local Government Fund as-was. Motor tax, etc, funds this.

The LPT figure is nonsense though. DCC are expected to retain at least €41m in LPT in 2016 (pre-variation minus the 15% reduction variation). There is also a surplus figure which I still don't fully understand where they're getting it from but suggests 50M.

http://www.environ.ie/sites/default/files/migrated-files/en/Publications/LocalGovernment/Administration/FileDownLoad,43581,en.pdf

77M is the total amount of LPT taken in before the 20% is given to 'equalisation'

newacc2015

Phoebas wrote: »

You'd rather that we didn't spend money on homeless families in Dublin as long as those 'bloated' CoCos in the west don't get anything.

Want ketchup with that chip?

I would rather DCC kept its entire LPT and I'm sure most Dubliners want the same. When there is homeless people in Dublin, do really need to be sending part of 20% of our LPT to fund the general running of another council? We could double LPT tomorrow to help homelessness. But we will be doubling what we give to other councils too. It is not an efficient use of funds.

You might think it is grand that the average Dublin home is paying more LPT to other councils than a sizeable amount of rural dwellers are paying to their own council. But I dont think so and neither does most of Dublin either.