I call on the Deputy Leader to facilitate a debate on social housing and the programme being advanced by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly. There are approximately 90,000 persons waiting for social housing within the State. In my county the submissions which have been sent back by local authorities to the Department show that there are 1,675 individuals awaiting a local authority house. The figures are larger in urban areas. We need to have a debate about where the funding is allocated, having regard to the numbers in need. There is an efficiency and value for money way out of this, whereby the State could go back to providing houses in rural townlands such as the old labourers' cottages which can be built, according to contractors, for approximately 60% less than a traditional house in an urban area. There is an issue about the role State policy plays in urbanisation, as well as regional balanced development. I ask for a debate on that issue, including on housing need.

I concur with the view of my colleague, Senator Diarmuid Wilson, which was reiterated by Senator Rónán Mullen, on the discriminatory withdrawal of State resources from the marriage counselling agency ACCORD. The sceptic in me would suggest that it is coincident with ACCORD's position on the "No" side of next week's referendum. It is odd that, ten days out from the referendum, there would be a move of a suppressive nature rolled out by the State. If that is the case, or if there is any hint of it, it is disgraceful that a Government would instruct that taxpayers' money be withdrawn or used to try to influence a vote. It is wrong. The people will decide. The State, particularly the Government, should stay well clear of using taxpayers' money to influence voters one way or another. Senator Diarmuid Wilson put it well when he stated ACCORD had served the country and the institution of marriage well during the years. The funding should be reinstated.