Mr. Damian Allen:

I will deal with some of Deputy Murphy's questions first. In terms of how the voluntary code has worked, the evidence is that it has worked very well. It has been a positive experience for the bodies that have engaged with the interim regulation office. The principles of enabling and learning that have been inherent in the application of the voluntary code are something we want to ensure are maintained through to the Statute Book. That is something we have been keen to observe and maintain. For example, in the publication of the financial standard by the regulation office during the summer this year, it can be seen how it has been made proportionate. For example, if it applies to one of the larger approved housing bodies, there will be quite an onerous requirement on it to provide information. However, in so far as it applies to the smaller, so-called tier 1 approved housing bodies, the same level of long-term business planning and strategic plans do not need to be provided. Instead, they need to provide detailed income and expenditure accounts. As such, the application of the code has been tailored. It has worked very well and it is something we would like to ensure is maintained as the legislation develops.

I was asked if the Bill will assist in upscaling. I think it will because the presence of regulation has been shown in other jurisdictions to be an important consideration for lenders in order that there is some structure to underpin the overall sector. From that point of view, it should help. However, it is but one of a number of measures required for upscaling to take place. The Department works very closely with the sector in the context of the social housing strategy and the working groups there to look at what those various levers might be. Regulation is one, obviously, but the funding schemes and the mechanics behind them on the release of funding and at what stage in a project and how quickly it happens are all important considerations. While it will help, it is just one of a number of levers that need to be in place for upscaling to occur.

I was asked if the obligations are balanced. I think they are. I acknowledge that crafting the legislation is a balancing act in terms of providing sufficient powers for the regulator to function when it needs to while not wanting to interfere with the boardroom decisions of approved housing bodies, AHBs, on their own investment decisions and so on. This is a balancing act and something of which we are very conscious. We are trying to ensure a balance is present in the general scheme.

I was asked whether the landlord-tenant relationship could be integrated. Only two weeks ago, we enacted the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2015 which extended the Residential Tenancies Act to AHB tenants and landlords. That has worked to some extent to remove one of the areas of fragmentation that existed. At least now tenants in the private rented and AHB sectors have a common place to go. However, we still do not have a one-stop shop for all tenancies and providers of housing. What we propose in the context of the Bill is a very specialised outfit. There is merit in the short term at least in focusing on that and getting the regulation right before looking at a catch-all structure to encompass all tenancies and providers.

In terms of the number of bodies that are active, Deputy Dowds is correct that there is a large number of approved bodies at 526. There is a huge disparity, as the Deputy probably knows. Many of those bodies are very small local community projects which are providing one to four houses in their community. At the other end of the scale there are quite large bodies that are providing hundreds and even thousands of homes for people. It is quite a disparate sector. A total of 210 bodies have registered or signed up to voluntary regulation. One could say that is an indication, perhaps, of the ones that are most active and developing. However, looking at the regulation office's report, I believe the regulation office plans to undertake a review of all the approved bodies, and the Department will work with it on that, in terms of trying to get a better handle on the balance of 300 or so as to where they are, what they are doing, whether they are still in the business of providing housing, whether they are still in the business of wanting to develop that or whether they are happy with the service they currently provide, which might be just to maintain their service for the small number of properties they have.