Frank O'Rourke (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Jordan for all his help with various tenants down through the years. I have a number of points and questions on which I would like him to comment. We know one of the main reasons for homelessness is that there is no activity in construction in either the private or public sector. That is the real problem. Without prejudging the outcome of the proceedings of this committee, one of the outcomes we would like to see is the actioning of construction activity. We need to improve supply urgently.

I acknowledge Mr. Jordan is not here to comment on the rapid-build initiative. I do not share the view on rapid-build units because it has already been demonstrated the cost is way in excess of the cost of building a conventional property. This needs to be taken on board.

The lifespan of rapid-build properties is of concern. The construction time has not proven to be any faster than with a conventional build. That is a concern. I acknowledge there is a massive crisis. We need to have supply and when we have it, it will deal with all the issues we are all speaking about this morning. However, if there is a knee-jerk reaction, we will be back here having this discussion with hindsight, having to learn from it. That is important.

Tenant protection is also vital. For all of the landlords in the private rental market who do excellent work, there is a minority that does not do good work. What are Mr. Jordan's views? Is he in favour of temporary rent supplement increases to assist people at risk of becoming homeless until supply is back in the market? Whether we like it or not, we must currently rely on the private sector to keep people off the streets. In my constituency of Kildare North, I engage with tenants and landlords to get properties. They are not an attractive tenant for landlords because there is such a demand from people who do not depend on social welfare payments to rent the property. As such, one has to engage to persuade the landlord to take them as tenants. Without that engagement and supply from the private sector, we would have a lot more homeless families.

I would also like to hear Mr. Jordan's views on the HAP scheme. It is currently geared towards one's accommodation need. Due to shortage of supply, one has three choices if one is looking to get a property which has one room more than one needs. One stays homeless, makes the top-up or there has to be flexibility within the HAP scheme to allow that to be approved to avoid the family being homeless because that is a reality. Anyone who believes top-ups are not happening is not on the ground. A number of families want a one-bedroom unit, but these are not available. If they get a two-bedroom unit to avoid becoming homeless, they must make up a huge differential in the rent because the HAP scheme is only geared at their need.

Is the risk of compulsory long-term leases going to eliminate properties being available for those availing of social welfare payments like rent supplement, the HAP and the RAS? My concern is that while we have to protect the tenant, some of the measures we need to put in place as a matter of urgency equally have associated risks which might remove these tenants from consideration by landlords. That will mean they remain homeless.

I share Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan's views on the standard of accommodation and tenant protection in that regard. While it is a minority, I have a number of constituents for whom the standard is appalling. If they complain, they are asked to move out while the work is being done and are not then allowed to move back in. That is a problem. What is the way around that? There is no immediate answer until we get supply back into the system.