Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

When the housing assistance payment, HAP, was introduced in 2014, both I and others made the argument that unless it was accompanied by a large-scale build, we would see more and more money used on current, as opposed to capital, spend and we would be paying in perpetuity. In 2014, when it was introduced, there were 285 either builds or acquisitions. In 2015, it was 4,000; in 2016 it was 4,025; and in 2017 it was 4,209. If we look at HAP, and not at the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, there were 485 in 2014; 5,680 in 2015; 12,000 in 2016; 17,000 in 2017; and so on. It is exactly as predicted. It is really bad value for money. It is not only bad value for money but it is a poor social policy. We know that the most efficient spend is by direct builds in terms of cost. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has said we are now moving from HAP and RAS to long leasing, enhanced leasing for 25 and sometimes 30 years. In fact, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform concluded that long leasing at the height of a rental market in high-demand areas represented bad value for money. What analysis has the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage done on getting value for money and on shaping policy so that we will get value for money? The Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, report produced today recommends that we spend considerably more on housing, because it is driving costs in the economy. What bearing will that have in terms of housing policy and on value for money?