Mr. John-Mark McCafferty:

I thank Senator Boyhan for the feedback about the input. One of the key points he raised that we wanted to raise in the question and answer session is around single people and how, in effect, the system intentionally or unintentionally discriminates against them. One could argue that Threshold was founded partly on the basis or strongly on the basis that even when the State was providing a high quantum of social housing, many single people were left to the vagaries of the private rented sector long before it was regulated in the way it is now and that many people had to face bed-sits or other poor-quality accommodation and unregulated levels of rent. All ruling parties since the 1980s have made a very deliberate decision to divest themselves of a social housing system and to rely on the market to provide for people on middle to lower rents in the private rented sector.

We welcome the fact that we now have frameworks in place like HAP, improved security of tenure legislation although there is still a fair bit to go, and the removal of bedsits, which we warmly welcome. We have still a good way to go in terms of standards and I know that the committee will consider the matter in the future.

A key issue we want to mention is the fate of single person households. We urge the committee to be mindful that the number of single person households in the State is increasing. A family comprising two or three children and two parents is still part of society but the share of that size of family has radically shifted in terms of household composition. Neither the housing market nor developers has reflected the change when they choose to build. The planning system does not reflect the change and public policy does not adequately reflect the change. That scenario is manifest in the housing situation. We seek a shift in policy in terms of how the change manifests itself in allocations, and also in the wider construction and acquisition strategies of local authorities and approved housing bodies.