Yes.

I move amendment No. 8: In page 12, between lines 23 and 24, to insert the following: “(8) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (7) and (8) , a housing authority may set out additional criteria for eligibility of applicants for a specific affordable housing purchase arrangement with respect to income and asset thresholds and any other dwellings held under an affordable housing purchase arrangement by the applicant, with regard to ensuring access to affordable purchase for persons from each income quintile within …

I had intended to nuance this amendment further by robbing some of the language from Senator Boyhan's amendment No. 9, but I believe I resubmitted the same amendment as previously. This amendment would ensure that housing authorities were able to set additional criteria for applicants in terms of income and asset thresholds. I had expressed a concern about people who did not have a property previously or did not have large incomes but who did have significant assets, such as stocks. Housing authorities could consid…

The amendment had been spoken to by most Members. Was I due to respond?

No. I will reply to the contributions. I do not know if I will withdraw the amendment because Senators have expressed concern about ensuring that each quintile would be represented. There was concern, for example, about only having the bottom two quintiles represented. My amendment addresses all quintiles. The amendment means the Government would think of affordability for each quintile in the country, including those in the bottom 20% of incomes, those in the next 20% of incomes and so on. My amendment addresses a…

I second the amendment.

I move amendment No. 10: In page 13, after line 38, to insert the following: “12. Where a dwelling is being made available for affordable purchase under a Part V agreement under section (5)(b), that dwelling shall be made available for affordable purchase according to such criteria of affordability as may be set out by the Minister in regulation or by the relevant housing authority, and there shall be no obligation on a housing authority or State body to provide any financial contribution above such an agreed affor…

I move amendment No. 11: In page 14, line 7, to delete “or (b)”.

I move amendment No. 12: In page 14, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following: “(5) For the avoidance of doubt, the affordable dwelling contributions from a local authority or any other State body in respect of an affordable dwelling made available for sale under a Part V agreement as specified in section 5(b) or section 7(2) shall not be a financial contribution.”.

I accept 40 years is better than 50 years. I still believe the State should aim for cathedral thinking, in which we look to long-term thinking. It is one of the great prerogatives and opportunities we have as a State and it makes many things possible. I regret to see the amendment previously put by Senator Moynihan, which related to this issue, is not resubmitted at this point. I hope it might emerge again in the Dáil. It stated that while 40 years may be fine in general, when it comes to situations in which grants…

First, I thank the Government, as Senator Cummins said, for accepting the principle of and using the exact wording of my amendment on Committee Stage. It is an appropriate caveat to add because it is an area in which we have seen some abuse. It has been exploited as a loophole at times. In recent editions of the Dublin Inquirer , for example, we have seen cases where service fees etc. are being added to rents and used as a loophole to get around the rent freeze or the limiting or capping of the increase at 4% and e…

I move amendment No. 16: In page 32, line 26, after “dwelling” to insert the following: “as is necessary and appropriate and which will be subject to appropriate maximum threshold as may be set out by the Minister in regulation”.

I move amendment No. 17: In page 32, line 26, after “dwelling” to insert “as is necessary and appropriate and which will be subject to regulation by the Minister”.

I move amendment No. 18: In page 32, line 27, after “maintenance” to insert “or adaptation and retrofitting”.

If the Leas-Chathaoirleach could bear with me for one moment, I forgot to speak to this amendment, so I will say one sentence, which is to indicate why I am looking to-----

I accept the Minister of State's bona fides regarding the concerns, but perhaps the issue of a universal design for cost rental needs to be considered. He mentioned sinking funds or planning, but we need to plan for 18% of the population having a disability.

As such, at least 18% of any cost rental development should be designed to accommodate those persons. I am happy to work on this with the Minister of State through other means that the amendment.

I am happy to withdraw the amendment with a view to future engagement.

I second the amendment.

Senator Moynihan has put it very well. There is a point I should have made earlier when we were discussing the previous amendment from Senator Boyhan that referenced the bottom 40%. The Minister of State might note that given we are only reserving 10% for affordable housing under Part V, it would be very reasonable to have 10% of developments affordable to the bottom 40% of earners in this State. It seems a very reasonable provision. It is similar where the median income is concerned. When he spoke earlier, the Min…