Ms Cathy Bryce:

I very much take the Deputy's point that a house is not a school, although we have learned a great deal from delays with schools and the impact they have on local communities. Perhaps the Deputy's point is that effect could be multiplied in the case of social housing. I take that point. Much thought has gone into developing the community aspect of these schemes. There are detailed requirements in the project agreement on helping tenants with energy management and setting up schemes with good community services, play environments and so on. Much of that work is also done by the local authorities.

The collaboration between contractors and housing associations I spoke about mainly relates to long-term maintenance and building properties so that they will still be in good condition at the end of the 25 years and can continue to be used. I take the Deputy's point that local authorities may not have been given sufficient money over the years to allow properties to be maintained on an ongoing basis. That is not to say that those costs have not arisen. The fact that the money is not spent potentially leads to greater issues down the line. Perhaps the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland could comment further on this. If something is left too long without maintenance, it requires significantly more money to refurbish it. The Deputy spoke about the issues that arise in refurbishing houses. The PPP model focuses the mind on the longer-term asset because it is a State asset at all times. It is a State home on State land and the focus has been on trying to ensure these homes are still in good condition at the end of the contract period.

There are costs and risks. Deputy Boyd Barrett spoke of taking on risks. Once the State decides to build and maintain houses, schools or hospitals, risks arise. It is not that anyone is taking on additional risks, it is just that risks are inherent in the projects. The issue is to try to find the best ways of managing those risks. We think it makes sense to ask the private sector to help manage some of those risks. It helps to focus minds in the private sector on the longer-term assets rather than on just building things that will look fine for a number of years but which may not stand the test of time. The PPP model attempts to do that and in that sense, I believe it has merit.

The Deputy spoke about panels and efficiencies. On the efficiencies we see arising, once we have identified the sites some schemes may operate across different local authorities. Work with the local authorities on how the management of oversight of such schemes would work is now well advanced. We see some efficiencies arising there. On the Deputy's point on procurement, having recently joined the agency I am looking at the issue with my colleagues to see if we can squeeze those timelines further. The aim of everybody in the NDFA, the local authorities and the Department is to provide these units as fast as we can, but also as safely as we can. We want to make this process quicker.

On the timelines, we know that housing will be an issue for the next five to ten years. We need short-term measures, and various agencies are looking at them, but the homes delivered next year and in subsequent years are a very valuable part of the overall solution. To put it in context, PPPs make up a relatively small part of the proposed solution. We talk about them as if they were providing 50% of output or something like that. It is nowhere near that figure. PPPs account for a relatively small proportion of the solution.