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

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. It is almost as though we have three tiers in terms of funding for social housing delivery. There are various funding mechanisms for private sector-led developments such as PPPs or enhanced leasing whereby the developer gets full cost recovery plus additional premium and risk. They get the highest level of payment for what they do. Approved housing bodies get a lower level of deal. They get full build cost over the lifetime of the availability agreement, an element of cost recovery for maintenance, although I am sure there is a tough haggle between the bodies and the Department in that regard, and a small administration fee. Local authorities get build costs but do not get an availability agreement and, therefore, do not get full cost recovery and must rely on differential rents. It is not a level playing field for the three sectors. Do Mr. McManus and Mr. O'Connor consider that a fair characterisation in terms of their projects and the engagement of some of their members in PPPs, etc.? What is their view on the unfair advantage which many of us consider the private sector is getting over their sector through enhanced leasing and PPPs? For example, it is not possible for them to apply for enhanced leasing because one would need 100% capital upfront and it is unlikely that a bank would lend 100% capital to most tier 3 approved housing bodies, which is why we have Government grants, etc.

My other concern regards public private partnerships. There is a PPP scheme in my constituency which will be managed by an approved housing body. Do Mr. McManus and Mr. O'Connor and their members consider that a space which the approved housing body sector wants to be in? Is it sensible for the approved housing body sector to be in that space rather than the direct delivery and management of its own stock?

If an AHB gets a plot of land from a local authority, it usually develops that land in accordance with local housing need following discussions with the local authority. However, under the Land Development Agency, LDA, it appears that there is a prescribed designation of 10% social and 30% affordable. We have been told that there is some flexibility in that regard but have seen not evidence of it. Its approach seems to be solely based on what the market can bear in terms of the financing of the development. Is that a fair statement? Do the witnesses have any concerns in that regard. They highlighted that it could be very beneficial in terms of accessing land for the LDA to works with their sector. Do they have a concern regarding large tracts of land only having allocations of 10% social housing and 30% affordable housing?

As Dr. Hearne knows, we share the perspective he outlined in his submission. The National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, representatives of which appeared before the committee earlier, cannot release many of the hard data which we think would allow us to evidence our claims that it is not cost effective. Has Dr. Hearne uncovered any hard data or comparative costings in his research to evidence the claims that private sector-led projects through leasing and public private partnerships offer better value for money? The NDFA, the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, and the Department state that such schemes promote risk sharing by off-loading some of the risk onto the private sector. I am not asking for Dr. Hearne's opinion but, rather, for him to present the committee with hard evidence from his or other research to demonstrate that the claim of risk sharing with the private sector is not all it is cracked up to be. How much of that risk ends up rebounding onto the State?

I acknowledge what was stated by the representatives of the approved housing bodies regarding land availability and finance issues. Obviously, they have a significant set of targets to reach under Rebuilding Ireland in the coming years.

My question is a slight aside from our conversation but, at the same time, connected. Given the lands in the pipeline and the availability of finance coming down the tracks, particularly in the light of the on-balance sheet status of the sector, how confident are the delegates that their organisations will be able to meet the targets? Do they have concerns of which they would like to make us aware?