Media: New Government proposals to tackle Homelessness

wordofwarning

Wanderer78 wrote: »

there will always be those that will abuse systems, its human nature, but i also suspect most that currently call themselves homeless are genuine.

I would like to think that. But nearly every high profile 'homeless' person in the last few years has had stories leaded to the press about them nothing the person who they seemed.

Like that martyr who was living in a hotel room with her daughter as she could not accommodation. Turns out she refused several houses, as she wanted a house for life. She was going to live in a hotel until she got. There was the homeless guy who died last week, who did not have a wholesome past. There are very few high profile homeless in the media, who have not exposed as being extremely bad characters

Wanderer78 wrote: »

these 'free' statements are complete nonsense, majority of citizens pay some amounts of taxation, some more so than others.

Some amounts of tax is right. But that is the issue. How do you fund amazing social housing like Germany or Denmark? You have to have high levels of taxation. The crowd that are most likely to benefit from social housing, are the exact same people who refuse to pay for anything. The areas that had the lowest levels of employment in Dublin, were the exact same areas opposed to bin charges, water charges, etc etc.

If you ask all crowds living in hotels, would you pay more tax to have a roof over your head. I imagine the answer is no, as they want someone else to pay for that house. They don't want to contribute to society enough to have a decent social safety net

Arcade_Tryer

Sad Professor wrote: »

Murphy is disaster. I thought Coveney was incompetent but I never doubted his sincerity. Murphy looks like he has to practice his earnest face in the mirror every morning.

Strikes me as someone who believes they are much more clever than they actually are; and consequently seems to be searching for clever solutions to the crisis rather than trying to implement the more obvious and simple ones, which are to increase the social housing supply and reduce height restrictions.

FF put forward the idea of giving tax breaks to developers recently to build more housing and were pilloried by all and sundry. But it wasn't an entirely outlandish idea; and the criticism seemed to be a case of cutting of one's nose to spite one's face; as in developers are going to have to be looked upon as a necessary evil if there is any hope of allaying the housing crisis. Plus, as a fan of neither, I'd prefer supernormal profits going to developers every day of the week as opposed to REITS and rent-seekers.

Uriel.

Children's allowance that's another one. That needs to be scrapped.

Watched that housing programme the other night on Rte and a number of the families struggling to get a house fit for their purpose were popping out kids like be damned. It's a complete ride of the system.

The money that goes into children's allowance should be changed to tax credits or a creche credit or something like that. Popping out kids shouldnt be a ticket to the extraordinary handouts given.

jimmycrackcorm

Uriel. wrote: »

Children's allowance that's another one. That needs to be scrapped.

Watched that housing programme the other night on Rte and a number of the families struggling to get a house fit for their purpose were popping out kids like be damned. It's a complete ride of the system.

The money that goes into children's allowance should be changed to tax credits or a creche credit or something like that. Popping out kids shouldnt be a ticket to the extraordinary handouts given.

Unfortunately it is political suicide to scrap it. I'd much prefer if it was used to provide free school books, meals, uniforms etc. I presume though that for people paying crèche fees that it is actually going a tiny bit towards that.

As for the governments announcement at least it's looking at different aspects that need to be changed. The multiple housing refusals is ridiculous as it prevents housing being allocated quickly.

The biggest blocker is this new age idea that we cannot build council estates any longer, that we need integrated housing. That is an ideal but relies in over-expensive private housing to provide a small allocation of social housing. Patently this cannot work as private development isn't even providing enough.

Like it or not we have to build the Ballymun style large scale housing but instigate mechanisms to remove anti-social behaviour such as forced removal of the bad apples. If we don't take action like this then this will be an annual thread until it happens.

VonBeanie

Uriel. wrote: »

Children's allowance that's another one. That needs to be scrapped.

Watched that housing programme the other night on Rte and a number of the families struggling to get a house fit for their purpose were popping out kids like be damned. It's a complete ride of the system.

The money that goes into children's allowance should be changed to tax credits or a creche credit or something like that. Popping out kids shouldnt be a ticket to the extraordinary handouts given.

At the risk of being accused of being a socialist (there is a first for everything !!), I don't agree with scrapping Childrens Allowance. Some parents are poor, some abuse drugs or alcohol, some are just not very good parents. The children though, don't choose to be born and don't choose their parents. Childrens allowance is probably the single best weapon against child poverty. All abolishing childrens allowance would do is punish children for the irresponsibility of their parents. Give them a chance, they may grow up to pay taxes !!

I'm sure there is more wasteful government spending that could be used to help housing policy. Some government measures (such as allowing higher rise buildings) don't even cost money.

listermint

Titus Inexpensive Tarp wrote: »

How many on the housing list are working? Very few I'd imagine. .

I would say most or the majority.

I think you've a skewed view of the housing list.

The_Conductor

jamesthepeach wrote: »

For the sake of equality are they going to offer people on the housing list in the rest of the country the chance to choose houses in Dublin

Its not an equality measure- its the fact that there are 1,300 houses (and less than 200 of them are apartments) ready to go in 'rural areas'- whereas there is nothing- pretty much nothing at all- in Dublin.

Dublin is in a funny position- in that homeless people from all over the country- including our other cities- tend to congregate there. There are more homeless from Cork, Galway, Sligo, Kilkenny and Wexford (going in order of declared numbers)- in Dublin- than in any of their origin cities.

The Minister imagines- he can tap a portion of these, lets call them 'internally displaced people' and offer them accommodation in their home cities and towns- and hopefully access to support structures that he imagines they may have there- making a meaningful dent in the overall homeless numbers- for the least possible effort on his part.

No-one, of course, has been arsed asking people from these 'rural areas' (very few of them are rural)- whether they have one iota of interest in a property in what is often rural accommodation.

Keep in mind- there is a rather high profile lady- who lost her husband earlier this spring in tragic circumstances- who has been offered a house outside Ennis- but is voluntarily staying in a car outside the cemetary her husband was buried in, in Middleton in Cork. She doesn't want to move to Ennis, she counts in the stats as a refusenik- and she has two kids living in a car outside a cemetary who started back in school two weeks ago...........

There are myriad of reasons people refuse accommodation- and not all homeless are being put up in 3 star hotels around the country- there aren't any two circumstances which are the same.

I think the Minister is going to be sorely disappointed at how many of his 1,300 ready-to-go properties remain uninhabited. Many of these properties features in Allsop auctions over the last 3-4 years- many of them were deemed entirely unsaleable- purely because of their remoteness- I remember one nice 22 unit apartment block in Ballybofey in Donegal- which had an AMV of 70k- which features on the Minister's list of available property in Donegal.............

The Minister is doing something. Is it something that was worthwhile doing- probably not- but it sure makes good soundbites..........

The_Conductor

Uriel. wrote: »

Children's allowance that's another one. That needs to be scrapped.

Watched that housing programme the other night on Rte and a number of the families struggling to get a house fit for their purpose were popping out kids like be damned. It's a complete ride of the system.

The money that goes into children's allowance should be changed to tax credits or a creche credit or something like that. Popping out kids shouldnt be a ticket to the extraordinary handouts given.

Make a representation to the Minister.
I know I did.
Anyone can spout vitriol on the internet- akin to your post.
Come up with a viable alternate- that is in the best interests of the children- and put it to the Minister- that is how you make change happen.

We have a system which hands cash to families based on how many children they have. How about a massive roll-out of the Deise scheme- whereby children are fully provided for by schools- clothed, all their books, breakfast in the morning, proper meals, an afterschool activity each day, dinner before they go home in the evening etc. I.e. it is a direct provision programme- but its done on a not-for-profit basis- and at every point the best interests of the children are assessed and provided for. The children in Deise schools aren't assessed- and there is no discrimination in favour or against kids on the threshold or better off- everyone is treated in an identical manner.

There are a few good schemes- like St. Mary's off Haddington road in Dublin 4- who have children attending who are living in the most abject of poverty- alongside a few kids who have parents in high paying high profile jobs. They are all treated with the selfsame dignity- property fed and cared for- and given the same opportunities as one another.

This is how I'd like to see children's benefit spent- and given the economies of scale- the children would likely benefit to a much larger extent- than shovelling cash payments out the door.

Uriel.

The_Conductor wrote: »

Make a representation to the Minister.
I know I did.
Anyone can spout vitriol on the internet- akin to your post.
Come up with a viable alternate- that is in the best interests of the children- and put it to the Minister- that is how you make change happen.

We have a system which hands cash to families based on how many children they have. How about a massive roll-out of the Deise scheme- whereby children are fully provided for by schools- clothed, all their books, breakfast in the morning, proper meals, an afterschool activity each day, dinner before they go home in the evening etc. I.e. it is a direct provision programme- but its done on a not-for-profit basis- and at every point the best interests of the children are assessed and provided for. The children in Deise schools aren't assessed- and there is no discrimination in favour or against kids on the threshold or better off- everyone is treated in an identical manner.

There are a few good schemes- like St. Mary's off Haddington road in Dublin 4- who have children attending who are living in the most abject of poverty- alongside a few kids who have parents in high paying high profile jobs. They are all treated with the selfsame dignity- property fed and cared for- and given the same opportunities as one another.

This is how I'd like to see children's benefit spent- and given the economies of scale- the children would likely benefit to a much larger extent- than shovelling cash payments out the door.

It's not vitriol.

I want to be clear on this, I'm not talking about removing supports for children, I'm talking about reconfiguring those supports so as there's less incentive to pop out kid after kid after kid to take advantage of a handout system.

We're already starting to see new (additional) supports such as free GP care (although I don't agree with it's implementation), which can take some financial burdens off parents but should in its own right act as an incentive to have children

Villa05

wordofwarning wrote:

Some amounts of tax is right. But that is the issue. How do you fund amazing social housing like Germany or Denmark? You have to have high levels of taxation. The crowd that are most likely to benefit from social housing, are the exact same people who refuse to pay for anything. The areas that had the lowest levels of employment in Dublin, were the exact same areas opposed to bin charges, water charges, etc etc.

Arcade_Tryer wrote:

FF put forward the idea of giving tax breaks to developers recently to build more housing and were pilloried by all and sundry. But it wasn't an entirely outlandish idea;.

FF tax breaks for developers resulted in the issues in the conductors post

The_Conductor wrote:

I think the Minister is going to be sorely disappointed at how many of his 1,300 ready-to-go properties remain uninhabited. Many of these properties features in Allsop auctions over the last 3-4 years- many of them were deemed entirely unsaleable- purely because of their remoteness- I remember one nice 22 unit apartment block in Ballybofey in Donegal- which had an AMV of 70k- which features on the Minister's list of available property in Donegal.............

Any measures need to be targeted to where housing units are needed and the only workable solution is to build a mix of properties for all. The state could do this creating a revenue stream to pay for it.

If the private sector can't do it. Set up a semistate company to do it.
If the EU block it we can make a strong case that it helps to cool a property bubble and avoid risks associated with a bubble.

Giving land and tax breaks to developers was tried and did not work

Uriel.

Well the AG has signed off on the use of CPOs for forcing the sale or rent of properties. There appears to be a suggestion that LAs will try a negotiated approach in the first instance - I'm not sure if that's a negotiating regrading the renting of the property, or the purchase of the property.

In the normal course a CPO would bring with it a higher cost to the State than the market value. I'd be interested seeing how this pans out

Rioga na hEireann

The_Conductor wrote: »

There are a few interesting articles in today's papers- as Minister Eoghan Murphy has come up with a smorgasbord of initiatives all together.

The Irish Times reports on his proposals under the headline: Families to be allowed refuse only one social housing offer

Link Location here: ?

The Indo take a slightly different tack- running with a 'To Hell to Connaught' type take on the proposals under the headling: Government to Offer Homeless Families the chance of house in rural counties

Link Location here:

A few of the main points of the proposals as follows:

A new 'intra-agency' homeless group to be setup (by the charities, Threshold, DSP and others- to monitor/manage homelessness.

Plans to mitigate the very high number of refusals of social housing (over 3,000 offers were turned down since 1st Jan 2016- the vast majority of which were in Dublin city and county). The vast majority of stated reasons for refusals- people did not like where the properties were, followed by- people were unhappy with the property size, or the fact that it was an apartment rather than a house, with no garden. Full length of top ten reasons for refusals published.

Refusal of a social housing offer to either move people down the list- or remove them from the list altogether.

Fast tracking of 'Place Finder' Services (as previously announced in the Programme for Government), to help homeless people find property

200 New emergency hostel beds for Dublin- some of which will cater for family units- by the end of November

12 million to be spent on 'Family Hubs' to support families who are not currently homeless, but who are 'at risk' of becomming homeless

New Rent-to-Mortgage Scheme for the 60,000 owners of PPRs who are in arrears of more than 90 days (he was asked at the conference about landlords in arrears- and fudged a response, however the inference was lending institutions will be assisted to fast-track repossessions).

1,300 social housing units available for immediate occupation in rural counties (an improbable number of these are in Cos. Donegal and Clare- why, I have no idea) (Relocation to rural counties is to be entirely voluntary- however, the Minister imagines demand will be very high). New advisory and other supports to be put in place for people who agree to relocate

Proposed amendment to the Residential Tenancies Act whereby any landlord who is proposing to end a tenancy will first have to notify the Residential Tenancies Board with the details- and the RTB will contact the tenant- outlining their options.

The Peter McVerry Trust have released a statement welcomming the Minister's proposals. Sinn Féin have released a statement strongly condemning them. Others appear to have very mixed views.

Personally- I think that these are a series of sticking plasters- treating the symptoms rather than the causes of homelessness. There are some very welcome measures in the Minister's proposals- however, there is also an element of being seen to being active- but in reality kicking the can down the road- which is what politiicians are so good at. We need supply- we critically need supply. Pointing to Donegal, Mayo, Clare and other counties- and finding they've over 1,300 ready-to-go social housing units- is really one of the biggest red herrings of all. The reason they are vacant- is because people don't want to live there. People are voluntarily making themselves homeless- rather than accepting these units.

Its a series of snappy sounding soundbites- and while the emergency measures are critical and its good that they are being delivered- they are shortterm measures- the long term solution has to be a massive ramp-up in supply. The private sector, including the 1480 AHBs, have proven incapable of addressing the housing issue. The government needs to tell the Local Authorities to get off their arses and get building- the current programmes of buying chunks of developments, which were going to be built anyway- is only canibalising the nascent private sector building programmes- the public sector itself needs to build social housing units on the one hand- and it also needs to stop selling them!!!!

I think this is good. IMHO the government realise this is a humanitarian crisis, at least in addition to it being an election issue - I'm not saying that that's their motivation, even though for sure they'll very very likely all be turfed out next election if they don't sort it - but these are the kinds of practical measures that are needed to sort the problems. If you have a good idea don't hesitate to help the minister's team with suggestions or support - they clearly want to get this sorted so let's help them if we can and be practical.

utmbuilder

should be a housing list for people looking for long term homes you want a free house thats fine, wait for it and live in a trailer park until there is one, an emergency trailer parks with security for homeless, then higher priced trailer parks with security for people who want cheap rent until enough housing are built.

students want cheap rent, live in a luxury mobile home, in a secure gated trailer park.

As an emergency measure it could work, either that or we will all become thinkers