John Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee. We really appreciate it. I will take it from where my colleague, Deputy McAuliffe, left off. He is right in what he said, and the witnesses' answers have probably given the response to the question he has posed in that they do not get people coming to them with issues with RAS because there is security of tenure there. That should perhaps be fed into the review. As we are here to discuss HAP, however, I will stick to that for the time being.

There is sometimes simplistic commentary to the effect that we should abolish HAP and pour all the money into building houses. That is a fine aspiration, but the question is never asked, what happens to our existing tenants in HAP tenancies? We cannot just forget about the fact that 60,000 people are in receipt of HAP. Mr. McCafferty said this will be a medium-term solution. I was happy to hear him say at the outset that he saw it as a better scheme than the previous rent supplement scheme for a number of reasons. One thing the witnesses have not mentioned during the course of their presentations or in response to any questions is the place finder service and their experience of same.

We have an integrated homeless hub in Waterford where all the agencies are in the same building along with the local authority. It is working exceptionally well. The place finder service is providing tenancies.

The Minister was in Waterford last week. One of the things that was cited was what one of the witnesses had cited regarding single person tenancies. In Waterford, when those rent caps were set, it was a very different housing market from the market we have now which, thankfully, is thriving. There is a limit of €430, and with the addition of 20% it is €516. A person would not rent a one-bed tenancy in Waterford for anything less than €750 per month. While that rent may seem small to a tenant renting in Dublin, it is all relative. What they asked for was a 40% discretionary. I am torn on the issue of increasing the limits. Despite what Ms O'Reilly said, namely, that because of the rent pressure zones, we should not see an increase, I believe we will see an increase, and that is the reality. I would agree with what they asked for, which is a higher percentage on the discretionary and that it would be utilised on an individual basis. Rather than increasing it for all the tenancies, because, for example, a family with a three-bed property in Cork need might need a higher increase than a single person in Waterford, if the discretion were given to the local authorities to vary it further than 20%, is that something that should occur and should it be fed into the review?