John Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I was calling for that for a long period at meetings of this committee, so I welcome the fact that it has happened. Feedback we got from the sector, including from Dublin City Council, Cork County Council and Limerick City and County Council, highlighted the fact they felt as though the €60,000 figure per unit was too low. That is direct feedback from the local authority sector; it is not just me saying it. From my interaction with the council in Waterford, which has delivered 50% of the national total of the repair-and-lease scheme, it is becoming increasingly difficult to deliver units with that €60,000 figure because of inflation in the construction sector. It is not a free €60,000; it is fully recouped by the Department, so it is not an expense to the State. Anything we can do to extend the figure to €80,000 per unit would be welcomed throughout the sector, not only by the local authorities I mentioned but also by the other entities involved. The sector is delivering these units. There is of no cost. It is just the finance cost of providing it and that is fully recouped by the State.

I know this space, and the Chair mentioned the fact I refer to it frequently. I get stick from all my colleagues on the committee because I talk about it so often, but I do so because I have seen the benefit of it. Waterford City and County Council has not used hotel and bed and breakfast accommodation for emergency accommodation in the past three years because one- and two-bedroom accommodation has been provided through the repair-and-lease scheme in city centre areas. That is the only reason we have not been using it. It frustrates the life out of me when other local authorities are not delivering through a scheme that has been proven to be successful in my county. Nevertheless, the figures need to be revised. I ask the departmental officials to take this as direct feedback because an increase is needed urgently in that space.

Moving on to the local authority affordable purchase scheme, we are making good progress in my county and I can speak only about that, given I know it best. It is not meant to be parochial but is just to give an example. A total of 119 affordable purchase units are currently available in Waterford and about half of them, between the LDA units and the council-contracted units, have been sold. One difficulty has become apparent. This is a learning exercise all the time. There needs to be an exercise in education with the prospective buyers on what this is. These are private homes; it is just that the State is taking an equity stake to reduce the cost to be able to assist the purchasers in purchasing the property. They are not social homes. Whether we like it or not, there is an element of stigma regarding the fact the councils are running the process on this. I am not criticising the councils. They are doing an excellent job - a team of two in Waterford City and County Council are doing a tremendous job - but there is an element of uncertainty and unfamiliarity, because the local authorities have delivered social homes primarily, that these are in some way social homes, but they are not. There is probably a case to be made for a centralised process for this such that applications would be managed by the agency, or something whereby the process would not be removed entirely from the local authorities but whereby the purchaser would be able to distinguish between the two bodies.

On top of that, when these homes went out for expressions of interest, income figures were attached to them. They are irrelevant, however, applicants are approved for the mortgage approval and income does not come into it. If someone cannot get a mortgage for four times his or her income, the question of income does not apply. There is a need for a calculator, similar to that which exists for the shared equity scheme, where I could put in the market value of the property, the mortgage approval in principle, the help-to-buy approval sum and the savings I have, and an indication would be given to me. Applicants would apply and the indicative figure for which they could purchase the property for would be given. That is missing but it would be a useful tool in the context of what is being developed by the agency. I do not know whether it has been discussed but it certainly reflects the feedback I am getting on the ground. What are the views of the Department in that regard? This is new.