Ms Caroline Timmons:

The Senator raised the issue of children with disabilities who do not have priority. As she will know, allocations are a matter for the local authorities. She probably knows better than I how they set their scheme of priorities. The vast majority of local authorities would include disability as one of the priority areas at which to look. It is not right to say that the matter is not prioritised but the Senator is right; there are competing priorities. The local authorities must also look at the homeless and other categories of people. The answer probably comes back to raising awareness of the people who have disabilities who are on these lists and ensuring that provision is made for them in the local authority setting. Design should be done at that level. It is probably not true to say that children with a disability are not prioritised. Quite frankly, they are given as much priority as the local authorities can give them. I would not think otherwise. There are, however, competing priorities. The Senator is right about that. Part of the solution to that problem is improving supply and another part is improving awareness at the level of the local authority. We need to do both of these. I agree with the Senator on that.

With regard to reviewing the national housing strategy, when we were putting together Rebuilding Ireland in 2016, the issue did come up. We were looking at it at that point.

It was agreed at that point that we would give it some extra time for implementation. We were going well. It needed more time to bed down. Now that the structures are up and running, we are at a level at which it may be possible for us to take on more ambitious ideas. This report can feed into the work the committee is doing. A review is scheduled to happen next year anyway. We will try to make sure as many people as possible can feed into the review. We need to do a proper consultation on this front across this wide and broad sector in order that we can come back with something meaningful and, we hope, ambitious. A great deal of feed-in will have to be done before that point is reached.

Senator Murnane O'Connor asked whether mental health is a priority. The Housing Agency has done quite a lot of good work in this area. It compiled a document about designing for mental health. This area is probably not as well understood as it might be. It is important that local authorities understand how to design for mental health. I was impressed by a presentation I heard last week from the Housing Association for Integrated Living, which is a very good approved housing body that deals with integrated living for people with mental health difficulties. There are groups that are doing excellent work in this area. It requires a level of expertise that might not be present in every local authority. The people on the committees who are representing the mental health sector have work to do to make sure awareness of these issues is raised. The local authorities should use the guidelines to help them to ensure they are designing for people with mental health issues. While a physical adaptation may be needed, sometimes it is about the location, accessibility or the package of supports. Work probably needs to be done in this space to make sure the support is there. We have put in place tenancy sustainment officers who have been very good in ensuring the tenancies of people with mental health difficulties are sustained. This initiative is jointly funded by the Departments of Housing, Planning and Local Government and Health. The function of the ten tenancy sustainment officers is to ensure people with mental health difficulties continue with their tenancies. When such people experience problems with their tenancies, the supports they require frequently involve making sure they can pay their bills and their rent, etc., and have nothing to do with the house. I am pleased that some good work is happening in this area.

If a local authority says that it wants a bungalow in a particular instance, it may decide to buy one. However, the Senator's question related to new builds. I am not sure we would favour new bungalows under the national planning framework density guidelines. Under the apartment guidelines, 50% of apartments have to be 10% bigger than the minimum. They lend themselves to this area of activity. This is the area of expertise of my colleague, Mr. John Wickham. He knows a lot about it. If a local authority tells us it has an existing bungalow that is potentially a good adaptation model for a decongregated setting, there is no problem with that. If it makes sense in a given area from a cost perspective, that is absolutely fine. I will ask my colleague, Mr. O'Reilly, to answer the question on grant payments.