Payment of rejected grant applicants
Treacy challenged the refusals, noting applicants had borrowed in expectation of grants and might otherwise have sought local-authority housing. O’Brien reiterated that he would not amend the regulations or pay any portion of a grant.
Will the Minister agree that the most important reason for these improvements is the relief of congestion? Will the Minister agree that most applicants have borrowed money and part of their repayment programme was the inclusion of the grant? Is the Minister telling the House that it would cost the State £2 million to pay these grants? In that event the State has saved £2 million by rejecting these applications. Will the Minister agree that these applicants through their initiative saved the State a lot of money because they could have applied to be housed by local authorities? Will the Minister give a commitment to the House to consider giving those applicants a percentage of the grant in view of their commitment to improve their position?
