We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil
‹ Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

Vulture funds and housing policy

Summary

Richard Boyd Barrett condemned the Government’s measures on vulture and cuckoo funds as ineffective and argued State housing spending was mainly flowing to leasing and private schemes rather than direct public building. The Taoiseach replied that the measures would have an impact and said the Government’s broader plan centred on large-scale social housing and affordable homes.

The Government's announced proposals to deal with the activities of the vulture and cuckoo funds are hopelessly inadequate, completely pathetic and not a serious attempt to deal with these cuckoo funds at all. In reality, the Government is beholden to these funds and deeply implicated in having brought them into the housing market. The 10% stamp duty will not act as a disincentive. These firms have the funds at their disposal to outbid ordinary working people. The provisions will not apply to apartments, which is where most of these funds are active. The planning regulations, similarly, will not apply to apartments or to all the strategic housing development planning permissions that are in play, a flood of which have gone through recently. These proposals are therefore not a serious attempt to deal with this issue and, to use a phrase the Taoiseach often uses, they will not deliver one extra affordable house for working people or make the unaffordable rents in the housing sector affordable. Neither will they deal with the scandal that was revealed at the weekend. The explanation for the Government's not taking serious action against the vultures and cuckoos is that the State is up to its neck in investing in these cuckoos through the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, formerly called the National Pensions Reserve Fund. I have just discovered that this includes investment in Bartra's co-living proposal in Dún Laoghaire. The State is building box apartments with Bartra. It is investing in short-stay aparthotels. This is unbelievable. Then in many cases these properties will be leased back to local authorities or they will fund the profits of these investors through HAP payments, 40% of the revenue from which goes into the pockets of corporate landlords.

The paper I am holding shows what these funds are saying about the profits they can make through leasing deals with the local authorities. The crowd behind this paper is called Housing Together. It boasts of Government-backed leases of ten to 25 years, unrivalled covenant strength, net initial rental yield of 5%, being ideal for investors seeking high income at low risk, the opportunity to lock in rents linked to inflation, no management of tenants, no rental collections or chasing arrears, no internal maintenance, no voids, no letting fees, no advertising costs and no ongoing refurbishment costs. Why? Because the local authority will pay for all that and at the end of the 25 years, the vulture fund, not the State, will own the property. We are, therefore, paying for this, the vulture funds and the cuckoos are running off with the profits and we have nothing at the end - no security, no affordability and no affordable rents. It is a scam and a swindle of Mafia-style proportions. Why are we not paying to build our own stock that is actually affordable for ordinary working families?

Comment on this

Thank you, Deputy. Your time is up.

Comment on this

The Deputy is wrong in his assessment of last night's measures because they will have an impact, both on the planning side and in respect of stamp duty.

The stamp duty will have an impact, much broader than just the funds. The stamp duty disincentivises multiple buying of houses or duplexes and gives the advantage back to first-time buyers and owner-occupiers. It is a much broader measure than the Deputy, Sinn Féin or anyone else on the far left anticipated.

The Deputy's response is the expected one. As I have said, the Government has allocated about €3.3 billion to housing this year. That is State money, separate altogether from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, or anything like that. That €3.3 billion includes a very significant allocation to social housing, with significant initiatives on affordable housing and a national cost-rental scheme which would provide houses to rent at 25% below market rate. The Deputy ignores all that every time he gets up to speak about housing. He narrows it down to one area and implies that is the broader picture of housing in this country, which it is not.

The fundamental issue with housing is supply. We are simply not building enough houses or apartments in this country. On the apartment front, there is an affordability and viability issue that needs to be dealt with. Hence the funds are in the marketplace particularly for apartments, as the Deputy just said. Many of those apartments would not have been built if it were not for the presence of funds, given that the banks are essentially out of housing to large intents and purposes and are not funding at the level that they would have been in previous times. The State is now the big provider of social and affordable housing through the variety of initiatives we have taken, including the affordable legislation the Minister is bringing in, which will provide directly State-supported affordable homes that the State will be active in providing as well as social houses for people.

The Deputy knows the Government does not get involved in any of the decision-making of ISIF. Its objective is to try to leverage to get projects off the ground. Fundamentally, the ultimate solution is to increase supply. The State needs to play its part with very large social housing provision and very strong support as well as providing affordable homes and affordable rental projects. There will also be a need for the private sector. I know the Deputy does not agree with that. I think his view is that every house, perhaps, should be built by the State. That seems to be his position. I do not believe that is doable or feasible in the coming years.

Comment on this

I think the private sector should look after itself. The Taoiseach is absolutely right: the State is the main mover in the housing market. While it is spending €3 billion, the problem is it is spending it on lining the pockets of the vulture funds, the cuckoos and the speculators. The vast majority of the money the State is putting in, which the Taoiseach just described, is going on the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, housing assistance payment, HAP, and leasing payments. It is not going into building our own stock of public housing because the State only managed to build 2,000 of its own local authority houses, while there were 15,000 new HAP tenancies last year with more on RAS and leasing arrangements. Now it gets even worse; the State is working with private developers to deliver the tenements of the 21st century, co-living, which the Government claims it has banned, but the State is investing with these private developers in it.

If we are paying for it anyway through tax breaks, through RAS, HAPs and leasing, and through investment from the strategic investment fund, we should cut out the bloodsuckers, cut out the middlemen and invest in providing our own stock of public and affordable housing. By the way, as the Government has not built a single affordable house, the Taoiseach should not peddle that myth.

Comment on this

The Government has now been in office for ten or 11 months. Over that time, we have made it very clear that we would have a broad suite of initiatives for housing, the key part being social housing and the building of 50,000 houses over the next five years. The Deputy keeps ignoring that. That is part of the €3.3 billion. The €3.3 billion has nothing to do with ISIF. HAP has been there since 2012 or 2013 to facilitate people on the social housing list to get housing. I would prefer, and we are moving towards, direct construction of social housing and affordable homes and to get more affordable homes for people at prices they can afford and also new initiatives on the cost-rental schemes and bringing back every available opportunity we have, such as voids, for example, through an initiative the Minister took in July 2020. We provided the funding and brought 2,500 units back into social housing last year and we will be committing to another 3,000 this year. We are sparing no effort to get houses up so that people can get opportunities. We are simply not building enough at the moment in this country. The Deputy's proposals would actually reduce supply not increase supply.

Comment on this