Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for the detail in their presentations. I have a starting comment before I put my questions. There are some Members of the Oireachtas who have tendency to beat up on local authorities in our debates about the housing crisis. I am certainly not one of them. While I have my criticisms and complaints about local authorities, it is important to put on the record the view of many on this committee as to what has happened to local authorities in the housing context since 2008-10.

There has been an 80% reduction in capital investment in social housing and a 23% reduction in staff, which is the single biggest loss of staff in any part of the public sector. There have been nine Ministers, senior and junior, since 2010 and there have been four plans and statements. While it is important that we should go into the detail, criticise and ask questions when local authority representatives are before us, I am firmly of the view that local authorities, in the context of their front-line operations, have been struggling to cope with a difficult set of circumstances over the past decade. I also wish to acknowledge that the witnesses have taken the time to come here today.

I do not accept that the social housing targets are ambitious, particularly if one considers the need that exists versus the level of delivery outlined in the current action plan and that which preceded it. The two do not match. There will probably only be 4,500 real social houses delivered this year in terms of units owned by local authorities and approved housing bodies. The figure for last year was roughly the same. Next year there will be far fewer voids and some new builds will come on stream but there will still only be between 4,500 to 5,000 units delivered. All of this is at a time when there are 90,000 people on the waiting list and a minimum of 4,000 households living in emergency accommodation, etc. I shall not ask the witnesses to comment on whether the targets are ambitious. If the Government was prepared to approach local authorities and state that it wanted to be more ambitious, what would be the capacity of the local authorities to deliver additional units if, as two Ministers have now told us, money is no object? What is the capacity to deliver if the Government was serious about wanting to increase the output of real social housing beyond the current rate?

The four-stage approval process is absolutely appalling. I am flabbergasted that the Department and the Minister have not tackled the matter. I do not understand how it can take so long to grant approval. The Department has repeatedly told this committee that it has worked on the matter and that its housing delivery teams have improved the process. I have heard, off the record, that it is still a slow and cumbersome process. I ask the witnesses to tell us, in as frank a way as possible, whether the process has improved. I am firmly of the view that there must be a way to reduce the process to a single stage lasting six to nine months once Part 8 has been passed and before construction happens. I would like to hear the views of the witnesses on the matter.

The next issue is land initiatives and public private partnerships. Many of us are concerned that the costs, in terms of the public sector's benchmarking for PPPs, will be very expensive over the lifetime of the projects. Can the witnesses who are involved in the projects share information about them and about the land initiative and joint ventures? Again, South Dublin County Council has not included affordable rentals in its model because central government has not provided an affordable rental model. Some newspapers have reported similar difficulties with Dublin City Council. If the projects go ahead, is there hope that there will be affordability either in terms of rentals or sales?

I have the same question on the local infrastructure housing activation fund, LIHAF. We have lots of exchanges with the Minister on where the affordability dividend from the LIHAF exists. I have a question for the witnesses who work with the LIHAF. Can any of them say with certainty that developments which benefit from taxpayers' money will deliver units in Dublin, for example, that will sell for below €300,000? Any progress update on the matter would be useful.

I have two big issues with homelessness. First, there is an absolute need to introduce an independent inspection regime for emergency accommodation, particularly where children are involved. My suggestion applies as much to the hubs as to the other forms of accommodation. I would like to hear the views of the witnesses on the matter. Would Tusla, for example, be the appropriate agency to deal with this?

Second, two pieces of research on homelessness were published by Maynooth University and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission yesterday. There is a big concern about the hubs. Most members understand that a hub is clearly much better than a hotel for all sorts of reasons. Given that 70% of families with children who are in emergency accommodation have been there for six months and that 40% of families have been there for more than a year, some of us are concerned that, by default, the hubs, which are supposed to be a short-term solution, could end up serving as long-term emergency accommodation. What can be done to institute a regime where no family stays more than six months in any form of emergency accommodation before being moved on?

Can the witnesses indicate how their HAP transfer lists are working? There is a considerable variation in terms of how they operate. I want to hear about the impact of being moved from a standard housing list to a HAP transfer list has on the potential length of time a person may have to wait before getting a full council allocation. Have people on the HAP waiting list been allocated permanent social housing?

It has been claimed that there are 183,000 vacant properties throughout the State. Even if that were true, we all accept that not all of the vacant properties can be used for social housing. I shall outline one of the matters with which we are all trying to grapple. Some local authorities have conducted scoping exercises. Can the witnesses tell me what the ballpark figure is in percentage terms? The Government is targeting approximately 3% of the vacant units over six years from the existing three schemes. Do our guests think that is a reasonable percentage? What percentage should it be? In light of the difficulties in getting some of the owners of vacant units to join the schemes, what do the witnesses think about a vacant home tax? The tax could act as a way to encourage people who, for no justifiable reason, sit on vacant properties.

Rental inspections are another matter. There is a huge variation in the level of inspections. What would it take to increase the number of inspections conducted by local authorities? Is it a staffing matter?

I have a final query about staff levels in general. The Minister keeps telling us that there is no end of money and staff and that local authorities can have everything that they want. That has not been my experience. I know that housing departments are struggling under a huge amount of strain. Can the witnesses give us a read of the situation? Is staffing a problem for front-line homelessness services? Should we, as politicians, advocate for staffing levels to be increased in the housing departments?