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

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. They know my position. I strongly support anything that takes the AHB sector off balance sheet as long as it does not in any way affect the not-for-profit and voluntary sector ethos of the sector. I know the witnesses' organisations share that view. I share and hear their frustration that, 18 months in, there does not seem to be much progress.

I am a little disappointed that we were not able to have representatives from the Department of Finance and the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government with us today, but we will pursue the matter and have them here at the earliest opportunity, either before or after the recess. We can only have half the conversation if they are not in the room to answer some of the questions raised by members and the panel; it is not a properly rounded conversation. The committee has made a commitment to pursue that matter.

We did ask the Department of Finance for a written submission, which it gave us, and we are happy to share it with the panel. I am disappointed with two parts of it. The Department of Finance states it has no direct involvement with approved housing bodies, that their outputs are outside the scope of its responsibilities and that its main involvement is in the direct collection of the necessary financial data to ensure the public finances are compiled and reported on accurately. That point is repeated at the conclusion of the short submission which goes on to state an outstanding action point remains to review the remaining AHBs which were not encompassed in the 2017 exercise. The only thing on its radar is whether the approved housing bodies that remain off the balance sheet should be brought onto it. That is worrying. While strictly the Department is correct - it does not have a direct departmental role with the approved housing bodies - it is central to working out the best way to solve the problem alongside the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government and the sector. If the statement is a reflection of the Department's thinking, it gives me great cause for concern. I wanted to share that view with the panel.

My questions are as follows. In as much detail as possible, will the panel outline how often the ICSH, the Housing Alliance or individual AHBs have met the Department of Finance and the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government on this issue in the past 18 months? The committee should know what level of engagement there has been and whether representatives have been brought in for meetings. Is there a sense that the two Departments are co-operating? I am not trying to get anyone into trouble with either Department, but the last time we discussed this issue it was clear that there was a level of frustration on the part of the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government at the lack of information flowing from the Department of Finance. It was quite open about it. Has the position improved? Are the Departments engaging with each other in any way?

I hear clearly what is being said about the supportive position of the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, but does the panel have a sense that this issue is not a priority for the Department of Finance? Without wanting to cause a row with one of the two Departments that are necessary to assist in dealing with this issue, is that where the blockage is?

I would like to know a little more about what both organisations mean by a "change-management programme". Mr. McManus touched on some of the headline items, but what needs to happen to ensure the 2021 deadline will be met? What does that change look like? Both organisations are engaged with the Department on the regulation Bill, but is that change reflected in the legislation or will it need to be added on Committee or Report Stage? That stretches a little beyond what this meeting is about, but it would be helpful for the committee to know where the regulation Bill is and what needs to change to meet some of the concerns expressed.

With the indulgence of the Vice Chairman, I have one last question. The other big issue we are all keen to resolve is getting the special purpose vehicle up and running to access alternative sources of finance, including credit union finance. There have been some exchanges between Deputy Darragh O'Brien and the Minister of State, Deputy English, on this and I am very sympathetic to Deputy Darragh O'Brien's position. The Minister has said help and funding have been provided but that the rest is up to the approved housing bodies sector as a vehicle that can borrow and the credit union sector as a vehicle that can lend. There is a lack of urgency in that regard, in the same way as there is in reclassification. Perhaps the panel might update the committee on that issue andm in particular, tell us what the approved housing bodies sector needs from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government or the Department of Finance to assist in gaining access to funding. It is crazy that since the Central Bank changed the lending rules for credit unions, not one single cent has been made available from them to the sector. I am a member of a credit union, as I am sure are other members. We want credit unions to lend to the approved housing bodies sector for social housing provision. Will the panel give us its view on that matter?