Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MEP BRIAN HAYES says he is concerned about the new mortgage rules introduced by the Central Bank that require homebuyers to have 20% deposits before they get a loan.
Speaking in an interview with Karen Coleman of EuroParlRadio from the European Parliament in Strasbourg, he said that the new rules need to be looked at again, stating that the tighter regulations have “unintended consequences” especially in the Dublin housing market.
“I think we have to look at it closely,” said Hayes.
Hayes said that it makes sense for a percentage of a deposit to be put in place, but said that it should be a percentage of a person’s salary, which should be the real multiple of whether they can afford a mortgage.
“I think maybe the Central Bank should should look at this again to see whether or not they have actually pitched the right proposal here,” said Hayes.
However, Hayes said that there is a need for caution. “We went through a madness number of years where we had bad regulation and bad control and supervision by the Central Bank”.
“We have to make sure that politicians don’t directly intervene in their rights here, but I think we should look at it again. There are unintended consequences.”
Speaking about rental prices, he agreed that it was not good for people paying out huge amounts on rent. He said that it was not good for the economy or the competitiveness in the economy to have such a lack of supply of houses.
He said that he did have relative confidence in the future of the housing market, stating that there is significant demand, especially in Dublin.
Hayes concluded that the real problem faced is that no homes were built because of the crash and now production has to be ramped up again.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
having read this article and in particular the final paragraph i think the heading is misleading and should be changed.
The use of statistical language here is also sensationalising the subject. While the probability may be 8 times larger, if the probability of a young man passing mutations is 1/10,000 and the probability of elderly man passing them on is 8/10,000 it is still a rare event.
Need more info to realise the true meaning of these “stats”
Heard another one yesterday saying older mothers made better…whatever actually can’t remember…there’s much crap ‘surveys’ our there, parents please ignore, make you afraid to have kids!!!
older mothers were more likely to have kids with better speech and less accident’s because the kids are more precious 2 them. wat bullshit like who’s kids aren’t precious 2them? I’m 21 and my 2 halfyear old son has brilliant speech and can hold a conversation. a 45year old I know has a child the same age and he’s had stitches in his head a dislocated wrist and I can never understand a word he’s saying… js sayin.
Eire if your child’s speech is on a par with your text speak rant you may have to reconsider his intellectual prowess
Charlie Murphy. seriously? fool
Mutations are the reason the human race has survived. Harmful mutations generally disappear in a population. The rest imbed the ability to adapt to changing environmental stress. Look at sickle-cell syndrome in Africans which helps resist malaria.
The potential for autism and bipolar is being hugely exaggerated by this research.
have your say