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

In some sense the solution to the loan finance is what already exists in the social housing sector. We have a Housing Finance Agency which provides Government-backed low-interest loans at 2% to 3% blended. The issue is the political question of whether, because they are on balance sheet, the State is willing to take that on. A facility could be easily designed, which could be operated by the SEAI or a stand-alone body modelled on the Housing Finance Agency. Even with a significant amount of borrowing, it would not have too much of an impact on the Government's debt-to-GDP balance given where the economy is going. If this issue is the priority we say it is, rather than convoluted off-balance sheet private sector financing models, which are always going to be more expensive, what we need is a model equivalent to the HFA to deal with it. The credit unions are now allowed to lend into housing. They have referenced up to 3% of a loan. It would not be a huge stretch to ask that one of their products be deep retrofitting. That would be eminently sensible.

When we talk about low-income families, it is important that we talk about low-income families based on their income and not their tenure. The ESRI has produced the research that shows that 70% of renters in the lower income decile face huge housing costs. Up to 40% of their net disposable income goes on rent. We need to target lower-income families, but a lot of them are in the private rental sector. A lot of them also are in the owner-occupier set. Of all new buildings built and bought between 1999 and 2009, only 1% has an A grade and those who own them are in significant financial difficulty and distress with high housing costs. I agree with Deputy Eamon Ryan that we need far greater loan finance, but it needs to be targeted especially at the people, whether council tenants or homeowners, who are in the lower income bracket. There are many who are outside of that bracket.

There is a third option to the two outlined. It is about an attractive loan offering with easy delivery and phase out dates. We did it with smoky coal, for example. That kind of firm regulation by the State went out of fashion for 30 years. Given the scale of the current crisis, it has to be part of the conversation as well. While it is fine to talk about how we can use pricing points to incentivise behaviour, the right loan and grant provisions, with speedy and easy implementation, provide the space for conversations about target dates. For example, if we were to offer landlords in the private rental sector a loan that is repayable at sensible rates, there would be no reason we could not state that particular targets had to be achieved in a particular timeframe and that they would have to move to the next target, say, five or ten years on from that. Without firm, legal regulations, a market left to its own devices, even with an even balance of carrot and stick, might not necessarily end up at that point. That has to be part of the conversation as well.