Ms Margaret Geraghty:

Fingal's funding allocation for the three years was €81 million. We have spent that and have received approval from the Department to spend double the amount by the end of 2018. Schemes we have approved to date - not ones we are dreaming about - will see us spending three times that allocation at a minimum. In terms of Fingal's response to the delivery of social housing, by any standard this is a very positive and comprehensive response.

In terms of units delivered, I am really not sure about the percentages Deputy Coppinger was calling out. I will give a broad overview to the committee in terms of the 1,400 units we have delivered to date. Between delivery by approved housing bodies, AHBs, which are mandated to deliver social housing just like the local authorities, and direct delivery by Fingal in terms of its own stock including voids, acquisitions, construction and Part V, it comes to about 60% of overall delivery, with the balance broken down pretty much evenly between the HAP scheme and the various leasing initiatives. In terms of the delivery of direct stock by not-for-profit organisations such as the AHBs and what Fingal is doing itself, that is coming in at 60% of delivery.

On the analysis of stock breakdown, I would like to make a point that was raised a couple of times in respect of voids. Every void that is turned around is a new tenancy. On an annual basis, Fingal would generally have between 100 and 120 void properties. It is not correct to say that void properties will drop off as a means of delivery. That is the annual churn that we experience. On an annual basis, we keep our void property that is under repair at less than 1%. People come off the housing list into those properties on an ongoing annual basis and that will continue.

In terms of our construction programme and the rate of construction, we have brought 18 Part XIs through our council in the past 18 months or so. I commend our councillors as it is sometimes very challenging to deliver social housing across the county. It can be difficult for elected representatives to manage the variety of schemes that are in operation. They have stood by us and supported us, including in respect of our rapid delivery programme. Our rapid delivery projects have also been given approval by our council.

I am not sure about the Deputy's point about reliance on the housing assistance payment, HAP. The percentages I presented a few minutes ago do not show an over-reliance on HAP in Fingal. Our experience in terms of HAP ending is that this is not the case. HAP is working very well for us in Fingal. We have had 342 HAP tenancies since it was introduced. It is proving to be a very good source of stock and one that people who are on the housing list are happy to - well, they are working with us in that regard and they do see - there are people who will avail of that option and they are availing of it and will continue to do so. It is a valuable source of additional stock.

Perhaps I was not clear on the methodology around vacancy levels, as other Deputies have picked up on the same issue. There is a requirement to be able to identify vacant properties. As the new census process kicks off, there may be an opportunity to look at how we do this. It is very important to note that the list for Fingal was 3,000. That was what came out of the census. We do not have exact addresses for those properties. We had among the lowest vacancy rate across the country at 5.3% so we already knew the numbers of vacant stock were not likely to deliver a significant amount.

We did a very comprehensive exercise in respect of the figure of 3,000. We took properties off the list that we knew were not vacant, as well as properties that were under construction, for sale or for social housing. We also took from it commercial estates such as our business parks, where property was included that was clearly not residential property. That left us with 376 potential vacant properties across the entirety of Fingal. Given the size of the county, it is a very low level. Our approach to the issue has been boots on the ground, to be blunt. We have not sat in offices looking at the numbers. We have gone out and put staff out on the ground. We are doing a street by street survey to ensure we are not missing anything. In one survey, for example, of 74 properties that were identified as vacant, it turned out that 13 were vacant while the remainder were lived in.

To take up Mr. Walsh's point, accuracy of data on vacant properties is necessary. In the context of high demand and high rental rates, however, even in cases where we do identify vacancy, the attractiveness of the scheme is limited. We are not getting significant traction on it, although we are continuing to get traction on our ordinary leasing schemes under the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, or the long-term lease. People continue to be interested in that as an option.

There was a point which I do not quite understand. The Deputy spoke about her time on the council and lands being passed over to AHBs. I am not really sure what she is referring to there. Is she referring to the unsold affordable scheme?