Mr. Michael Walsh:

I will hit some of the main points and members can then peruse some of the data in the opening statement at their leisure. Generally speaking, the local government sector has been involved since day one in assisting Departments and others to meet the challenges of the Ukrainian crisis specifically and also beneficiaries of temporary protection. We have done this is a number of ways. A significant number of emergency rest centres were developed in the first instance providing accommodation for approximately 2,200 people. These were intended for quick turnover and have generally provided that sort of service. We also assisted the Red Cross in the assessment of promises of accommodation throughout the country. We reactivated the community response forum and community call initiative in place during the Covid-19 crisis. That has generally worked pretty well. It co-ordinates services locally through engaging with the HSE and education and other services in providing integration across communities. They meet on a regular basis and, more importantly, specific personal relationships have been developed between the responsible people in all of the local authority areas at this stage.

The other significant initiative per sewas the offer of home initiative. Members will see some of the data related to the initiative in which we sought to put in place a streamlined process for people to offer unoccupied homes. It is important to emphasise the "unoccupied" part of that phrase. We received a significant number of offers. Of the more than 2,300 properties offered, about half have been accepted for use. The reason the other half have not been accepted for use is that they were not viable properties and were simply not good enough, to be honest, in some instances. In addition, once people became aware of all of the terms and conditions, if I can put it that way, of which there are not many, a number of those parties withdrew their offers of their own volition. In a significant proportion of cases, we did not accept the properties as we were not satisfied that they were unoccupied or that they should have been unoccupied. In other words, if they were located in housing pressure areas, or otherwise, we were not satisfied to accept them.

On the whole, we are satisfied that we have given a good level of service. We will end up with the bones of 4,000 people being accommodated under the initiative. In many respects, it represents the best solution for accommodation because it is "own home, own door" in the community, if members get my meaning. While it is not for us to say, nonetheless our perception of the initiative is that it has worked reasonably well.

We have been engaged in a second area since the start in many respects. Since March and a Government decision on the matter, I have been chairing a technical working group to try to move forward significantly the refurbishment of vacant properties. These fall into different categories. Members will be able to see in some of the tables information on whether the properties are local authority-owned, State-owned or belong to owners who need capital, which may be particularly difficult, and owners who can do direct commercial agreements and have the capital to do the work on refurbished properties.

Since March, we have been working with our colleagues in the Department, the Central Statistics Office, CSO, and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to put together a proper framework for doing this. We are nearly there and have a reasonable pipeline to get properties moving. I emphasise, however, that these are complex propositions in many instances. The reasons these properties require refurbishment and are sitting idle is that they are "problem children", as I would describe them. If they were easy to do, they would have been done already. We have a fairly good legal framework developed with the Chief State Solicitor's. We have a clear procedural framework with the different Departments for how the legal and practical arrangements will work. We expect developments in this area to gather pace.

A few hundred properties have already been done and there are nearly 400 bed spaces. We believe we will deliver perhaps 2,500 bed spaces before the end of the year and we should be able to deliver a similar number in the first and second quarter of next year.

I know many frustrated owners have been offering properties through the online portal and otherwise. We are now communicating with all of them and within the next couple of weeks, we will be able to give them a very clear direction in respect of the parameters within which we are prepared to work.

We and the Departments have agreed that one of our priorities should be to fully target better quality accommodation. We want good results and long-term use. If the State is, in effect, investing in these properties, we need to be certain there is a longer term positive use for them afterwards. We will stay a little bit away from the dormitory-style accommodation. We will generally look to get own-door solutions and, ultimately, a better solution that can contribute more to society, socioeconomically and otherwise, in the future. That sounds like a promise that everything will be all right from here onwards but, on balance, I believe we are in a better place now collectively. We have clear parameters in which we will operate and a clear procedural framework. It will never be seamless because there will always be owners with whom we will not agree, if I can put it that way. This framework, however, will allow us to deliver on a piecemeal basis admittedly. Some of these properties are three-month propositions, some are six-month propositions and others are even longer propositions. They are that complex. We have to do procurement and many other things. We believe we are in a place where we should get a nice pipeline and a streamed process going forward from here.

I thank the Cathaoirleach very much for the opportunity to make this presentation. We will be happy to answer members' questions.