Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 18 January 2017

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government

Quarterly Progress Report Strategy for Rented Sector: Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government

9:30 am

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Item No. 7 is the first implementation report under Rebuilding Ireland, the action plan on housing and homelessness. The joint committee is pleased to have the opportunity to discuss with the Department its first implementation report under Rebuilding Ireland, the action plan on housing and homelessness

I welcome Mr. John McCarthy, Secretary General of the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government and his officials to today's meeting. I would draw their attention to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the joint committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her or it identifiable. The opening statements submitted to the committee will be published on its website after the meeting.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I wish all the members a happy new year and welcome back to our first meeting of the year. I also welcome the Department here today. I invite Mr. McCarthy to make his presentation.

Mr. John McCarthy:

I thank the Chair and the committee for this welcome opportunity to come here today to discuss the first quarterly report under Rebuilding Ireland. At the outset, as it is our first engagement in 2017, I join the Chair in her new year's wishes to everybody on the committee from myself and the team.

I might start by introducing the team here with me today. I am accompanied by Mr. David Walsh, who is the assistant secretary in charge of planning housing market policy and land management, along with his colleague, Mr. Barry Quinlan, who co-ordinates our overall implementation of Rebuilding Ireland.

Mary Hurley is the assistant secretary who leads on the Department's housing programme delivery division and Bairbre Nic Aongusa is the assistant secretary who leads on our social housing policy, including homelessness and rental policy, division.

I think it is welcome that progress under Rebuilding Ireland is being discussed here at this committee. The session today is one in a series of interactions between the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, the Department and the committee. These meetings provide an important opportunity to update and inform the committee of key developments and progress and for us in the Department to receive feedback from committee members.

The focus of today's meeting is the first quarterly progress report under Rebuilding Ireland, published on 1 November 2016. That report charted the progress made on relevant actions since the Rebuilding Ireland plan was published on 19 July. It is the first in what will be a series of reports that will be published on a quarterly basis and we are currently working on the second quarterly report covering the fourth quarter of 2016. The intention is to finalise and present the fourth quarter progress report to the Cabinet committee on housing at the end of this month with a view to publication thereafter.

Initially, as members are aware, Rebuilding Ireland contained 84 actions across five key pillars of activity for implementation not just by our Department but also by a range of other Departments and agencies, and of course local authorities. One key action for delivery in quarter four last year was the publication of a new strategy for the rental sector and that was indeed finalised and published last month. As members will be aware, the necessary associated legislation was considered by the Oireachtas before the Christmas recess. Progress on implementing the 29 actions contained in the rental strategy in future will be incorporated into the quarterly reporting under Rebuilding Ireland generally and all the progress reports and up-to-date information will continue to be made available on the dedicated Rebuilding Ireland website.

Since the publication of Rebuilding Ireland, our attention has been firmly focused on delivery. Implementation of Rebuilding Ireland is being advanced across a number of Departments, as I have said, and is being taken forward under the oversight of the Cabinet committee on housing, chaired by An Taoiseach. Within our own Department, an implementation board of senior officials, chaired by myself and including my colleagues here today and other key senior officials, monitors progress on a fortnightly basis. In addition, an oversight group and a project board with a broader representation of delivery agents and stakeholders have been established. Working group structures under each of the action plan's five pillars have also been put in place. It is also planned to continue to hold regular, broadly based stakeholder forums on housing and homelessness, such as those events that were arranged to date in devising Rebuilding Ireland, and the strategy for the rental sector. These will provide a valuable means of feedback on the practical experience of implementation and will help to inform future policy formulation.

Subject to the agreement of the committee, I now plan to briefly cover the key issues and progress made under each pillar. Generally I will cover the progress reported in the quarter three report, and where possible I will update the committee on progress made since then. I will address the strategy for the rental sector under pillar 4.

Pillar one addresses homelessness. It is the top priority under Rebuilding Ireland, to be achieved through the delivery of the 21 cross-cutting actions outlined in pillar 1, and the priority associated with this is demonstrated by the extent to which the actions are front-loaded. Homelessness, as we all know, is a complex area of social policy that requires close co-operation across a number of Departments and agencies and this is reflected in the pillar one actions. While the key objective of pillar 1 is to move individuals and families out of emergency temporary accommodation, there are also important actions to keep people in their homes. While all efforts are being made to address homelessness, we must recognise the reality of the situation as outlined in the monthly statistics, which have shown increases since June in overall terms. Based on details collected from housing authorities in November 2016, a total of 4,436 adults used State-funded emergency accommodation nationally during the survey week. However, while there have been recent increases in homeless presentations, it is important to note that much is being done to address homelessness and to secure sustainable tenancies for homeless households. For example, during the first nine months of 2016, housing authorities assisted over 2,000 sustainable exits from homelessness, that is, into independent social housing or supported private rented tenancies. It is expected that a total of 2,700 sustainable exits will have been achieved during 2016 as a whole. This is a record level of exits from homelessness in this timeframe and it demonstrates the significant efforts of local authorities to help find more sustainable accommodation solutions.

Despite this record level of activity, the fact that there has continued to be a net increase in homelessness highlights the imperative of achieving timely and full implementation of the range of actions provided for across the pillars of Rebuilding Ireland in order to achieve the necessary increase in supply of housing in general and social housing in particular.

The following key achievements will have a significant impact. Strong progress has been made on the housing assistance payment, HAP, homeless pilot in Dublin. The final figure for 2016 will be published in the quarter four report. However, it is clear at this stage that the target to provide 550 stable and supported housing tenancies for long-term homeless households was significantly exceeded. The HAP scheme for homeless households represents an important new tool to assist in breaking the cycle of homelessness for individuals and families, reducing long-term reliance on emergency accommodation.

Abhaile, the new national mortgage arrears resolution service, and the associated scheme of aid and advice for borrowers in mortgage arrears, was launched by the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister for Social Protection. There also has been a focus on the provision of further family and child welfare supports for homeless families such as home-school community liaison services, through education welfare officers and Tusla's work on school completion programmes and so on. The Housing Agency's €70 million rolling fund to purchase vacant properties from banks and investment companies has been established with a target of 1,600 units to be acquired. One of the key targets under pillar one is to end the use of commercial hotels as emergency accommodation for homeless families by the middle of 2017 except in limited exceptional circumstances. In addition to the homeless HAP scheme, which I mentioned earlier, the key element of achieving this target will be the provision of 1,500 rapid delivery homes by the end of 2018. The Office of Government Procurement's rapid delivery framework is now in place and this will be an important tool that will allow local authorities to accelerate delivery in the months ahead.

Under pillar 2, the target is clear, involving the delivery of an additional 47,000 social housing homes over the period to 2021. An overall budget of €5.35 billion has been earmarked for this purpose. These homes are being delivered by local authorities and approved housing bodies through a number of different mechanisms including construction, repair and renewal of existing housing, both public and private, regeneration of certain areas and acquisitions, as well as various leasing arrangements. While the final detailed figures for social housing output will be collated and published over the coming weeks, provisional figures for 2016 indicate that in excess of 18,300 households have had their social housing needs met under the range of social housing schemes, ahead of the target of just over 17,000 that had been set for the year. In terms of social housing construction, the pipeline is very positive. From a situation of very limited new social housing units constructed in 2015, where the reliance was primarily in acquisitions and other delivery mechanisms, it is expected that the projects involving some 2,800 social housing units will commence on site under the main local authority and approved housing body construction programmes this year.

Pillar three is focused on securing significant increases in the delivery of housing in the wider housing market. We are currently finalising the housing output figures for 2016, for publication with the next quarterly progress report, but it is clear from the data to the end of November that they will show an increase on the 12,666 units produced in 2015. While the 2016 increase is very welcome, it is of course just a step along the pathway to increasing housing output to approximately 25,000 units per annum over the course of the Rebuilding Ireland plan. There are 12 actions under pillar three, dealing with funding and financing of infrastructure provision, active land management, planning reforms, construction design innovation and the construction sector's skills and capacity to deliver. The skills issue in particular is a very important area, given the estimated requirements for additional skilled construction workers, and our colleagues in the Department of Education and Skills and SOLAS are working to ramp up the delivery of skills training across a range of key areas. On the infrastructure front, 21 local authorities have applied for funding under the €200 million local infrastructure housing activation fund, LIHAF, seeking to open up more of the approximately 17,500 ha of land for development that the planning process has identified nationally for housing, 2,654 ha of which are in Dublin. There will be a further update on the assessment of these applications in the context of the quarter four quarterly progress report.

On the land supply side, relevant Departments, State bodies and local authorities have been contacted regarding lands in their ownership or control or both that may be suitable and available for housing development in connection with the development of a national web-based database of State lands. To make progress quickly, the survey of State development lands is focusing on Dublin and the main cities and urban areas with a view to having the details mapped later in this quarter, after which the approach will be extended to other regions.

Some 23 major urban development sites with the capacity to deliver 30,000 new homes in the medium term in the greater Dublin area, Cork, Limerick and Galway have been identified. Progress on these sites is being proactively monitored by the Department's housing delivery office, with a view to ensuring that the sites become exemplars for the co-ordination and delivery of plan-led housing development and active land management.

The Planning and Development (Housing) and Residential Tenancies Act 2016, which was enacted on 23 December last, enables large-scale housing development proposals to be submitted directly to An Bord Pleanála, while also enabling other important streamlining of planning processes and new tenant protection measures.

Finally under this pillar, a help to buy scheme was introduced by the Minister for Finance as part of the budget for 2017. Under the scheme, first-time buyers who purchase or self-build their own homes can avail of a refund of income tax and DIRT paid in the previous four years up to a maximum amount of €20,000. This refund can be used to satisfy mortgage deposit requirements, making home purchase more achievable for an increasing number of prospective home owners and, in turn, providing confidence to home builders to supply more homes.

Under pillar 4, the key action was the publication of a rental strategy. The strategy for the rental sector was published on 13 December 2016. Importantly, the strategy introduced the concept of rent pressure zones, RPZs, to provide rent predictability in areas of unsustainable rental inflation. RPZs have now been given a statutory basis via the Planning and Development (Housing) and Residential Tenancies Act 2016. In these zones, rent increases will be capped at 4% per annum. The measure was introduced with immediate effect in the four Dublin local authority areas and Cork city. The Residential Tenancies Board has been asked to accelerate the work to develop more detailed area-based rental data in the Dublin and Cork commuter counties and in the other main cities so that additional areas can be designated where the criteria are met. RPZs will be designated for a maximum of three years, by which time it is anticipated that new supply will have come on stream and eased the pressures on the rental market in the most pressured areas.

The Planning and Development (Housing) Residential Tenancies Act 2016 gives effect to other actions in the rental strategy relating to security. It prevents the termination of ten or more tenancies at the same time in a single development in order to facilitate vacant possession sale of the property. Sales in such cases will be conditional on the existing tenants remaining in situ. In addition, the landlord's right during the first six months of a further Part 4 tenancy to end that tenancy has been abolished and the duration of tenancies has been extended from four to six years.

The strategy also puts forward a number of measures that will broaden and strengthen the role and powers of the Residential Tenancies Board to more effectively provide key services to tenants and landlords. In addition, the working group on taxation of rental providers for which provision was made in the strategy has already been established by the Department of Finance.

Under pillar 5, while Rebuilding Ireland places a strong emphasis on the provision of increased new housing supply in respect of both private and social housing to meet demand, a further key objective of the action plan is to ensure that the existing housing stock is used to the maximum degree.

A particular focus in this regard is to bring vacant residential units back into productive use for social and private housing purposes. Through a range of initiatives and targeted policy reforms, harnessing the potential of these houses can contribute to the overall objective of increasing housing supply quickly to meet demand while simultaneously helping to breathe new life and vitality into the streets, estates and rural areas in which they are located. New initiatives, such as the repair and leasing scheme, are designed to realise this potential.

The Central Statistics Office has indicated that more detailed information and categorisation of vacant properties will be available in the housing specific report from Census 2016, which is being prioritised for finalisation by April 2017. This will be a critically important input into the new vacant housing reuse strategy which is to be developed under pillar 5.

In terms of use of social housing stock, choice-based letting, CBL, can play an important part in the more efficient allocation of social housing by local authorities, helping to minimise delays that can arise through offers of accommodation being refused. By using CBL, South Dublin County Council had the lowest reported refusal rate for social housing, at 5%, while in some local authority areas refusals were running at significantly higher levels. To ensure the further roll-out of CBL nationally, new regulations were made on 30 September 2016, requiring every housing authority to provide for a choice-based letting procedure in their housing allocation schemes by the end of the year at the latest.

I have provided a summary of the progress made in implementing Rebuilding Ireland in the months immediately following its publication. While I have concentrated on the quarter 3 progress report, where possible I have provided the committee with more recent updates on significant actions. A further and more comprehensive update will be available in the next progress report, which will be finalised and published in the coming weeks.

As the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, has indicated, Rebuilding Ireland is a top priority for the Government and the Department is fully committed to its effective delivery. I and my colleagues will be happy to respond to any issues or queries that members may wish to raise.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCarthy and I call Deputy Cowen.

Photo of Barry CowenBarry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If somebody else wants to go first, I just have to check something. That is, if the chairman does not mind.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sure. I call Deputy Ó Broin.

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and Deputy Cowen. I suggest that we ask our questions on a pillar-by-pillar basis. I have questions under each pillar and doing as I suggest might make it easier procedurally, if that is okay.

On pillar 1, I do not want to start on a sour note but we already know most of the information in the presentation. It is information of which we are aware because we have been working through this matter. For future quarterly reports, it would be better to get into the nitty-gritty detail that is not in the public domain straight away because that would save time.

I will address four specific things on homelessness. First, the homeless statistics released every month are not correct. I have raised this matter by means of parliamentary questions on a number of occasions. The statistics in question do not include adults and children in Tusla-funded domestic violence refuge accommodation or step-down accommodation; they do not include foreign nationals in transitional or emergency accommodation funded by the Department of Social Protection's new communities unit; and they do not include the approximately 400 families that are currently trapped in direct provision or those in transitional accommodation funded by the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, who have their stamp 4 visas. This means that the figures that are being released every month do not reflect the total number of people - adults and children - in emergency accommodation or transitional accommodation. It cannot be very complicated for the relevant Departments to feed all this information in so that when the statistics are released, they will reflect it. I urge the Department to take a lead role to ensure that we have accurate figures on that.

Tusla cannot tell me how many people it has in emergency accommodation when I table parliamentary questions on the matter. The Department of Social Protection will not give me any accurate figures. The Department of Justice and Equality has provided the figures for direct provision. If we are releasing a report saying that this is the number of homeless individuals and families and children, it should - irrespective of who they are funded by - include information on all of them.

I am concerned at the way in which those figures have been released two months in a row. I raised concerns when the October report was published because it was put up on the Department's website at 6 p.m. on a Friday, with no accompanying statement. The statement went up early the following week and it appears as if there was an attempt to bury bad news. The figures for November were released on 30 December when everybody was away on holidays. We had been chasing these figures for two or three weeks and we had thought that they would come out at the end of the second week or the beginning of the third week in December. Regardless of whether it is the case - and I am aware that the Department is extremely busy - it seems that those figures, which have been bade news for two months in a row, have not been given the same kind of media attention that the Minister is providing in respect of a lot of other positive news. He is very proactive in the media and many stories emerged over the Christmas period. The Minister published opinion pieces, press releases, etc., which is great. However, I am of the view that the figures should be released in a different way and I wanted to raise that.

On rapid-build housing units, there is no point in telling us how many of these are in the pipeline. We want to know how many are on-site and under construction at present. Another issue arises in the context of the use of such units. Some of us are currently working Part 8 planning applications in our local authorities. It is still not clear whether the Department is going to require the local authorities to tenant all of those rapid-build units with families coming directly from emergency accommodation. We do not know whether they be in there for a period of six months while they are being moved on to other permanent accommodation, whether these units will be their permanent homes or whether local authorities will be given a certain amount of flexibility, through the use of transfers, to ensure a much more integrated allocations policy. I would be interested to hear responses in respect of that matter.

"Exits" is a wonderful word because it does not exactly tell us what we are looking for. It is a somewhat similar to what happens when the phrase "social housing solutions" is used. What we would like to know is how many of these exits relate to households as opposed to individuals. Both figures in this regard would be useful. What do the people exit into? Can our guests confirm that they are all permanent long-term tenancies and that none of them are short-term supported tenancies of any kind?

The other really important thing that must be considered in the context of the figures - both in terms of the homeless figures monthly and the exits - is the average length of time that households are spending in emergency accommodation. The latter is a really important metric for us. I know it is difficult to produce. I imagine, however, that it would be possible - even by region - to say that the households currently in emergency accommodation have been there, on average, for a certain period and also to indicate the length of time for which those who have been the subject exits have been in such accommodation.

Lastly, there has been some controversy between Apollo House, Home Sweet Home and the Minister over the two new facilities in Dublin. I welcome that funding is being made available for those two facilities. I am merely interested because Dublin City Council councillors from all parties knew nothing about this until it was in the media. They first heard about it from the press. Obviously, there were conversations between the Minister and the housing managers in advance of his meeting with Home Sweet Home but I would be interested to know the timeline because none of us knew about these either. Did Dublin City Council approach the Department or the Department approach the council? When did that take place and when was funding agreed? I understand there are sensitivities about new homeless facilities because unfortunately, some politicians - none in this room but in local authorities - often play politics with it. Is it proper procedure that councillors and Deputies learn of these significant developments from the press rather than through the institutional meetings of committees, here or in the local authority?

Photo of Barry CowenBarry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the previous speaker that we should deal with each pillar as it arises and take questions on that.

On homelessness, I have something similar. The figure mentioned 4,436 adults in emergency accommodation nationally during the survey week. Can that be broken down into the number of housing units? Do we know how many children are involved? On the actions mentioned to alleviate this, I am conscious that the Minister and Minister of State with responsibility in this area have almost staked their reputation on this issue through the commitment they have given both to members and to the public that they will rid us of this horrible statistic by June of this year. Last year, the Department states more than 2,000 were taken out of homelessness and that was a record year. Now the Department states 4,436 will be taken out of homelessness and out of emergency accommodation by June of this year. The Department states that one tool that will be used to eradicate that figure to zero by June is the 1,500 rapid units to be built by the end of 2018. Unfortunately, the Department cannot square that circle. More to the point, we were given a commitment on the delivery of 350 or 500 modular units last year and we got 22 units. Somebody needs to tell the committee what exactly was or is the problem, whether it has been identified and will it be rectified. When Mr. McCarthy and others give commitments to the committee on a regular basis, in this instance that 1,500 units will be delivered by the end of 2018, have the lessons and the failures associated with previous commitments been learned, been owned up to and been rectified?

As I stated to the Minister previously, if it is such that there are legislative issues or logjams, let us know and we will do what we can to rectify the situation. This is an emergency and if emergency legislation is required, members will sit all night to pass it. It appears as though commitments are being made, left, right and centre, as well as launches, strategies and what not, but yet on the ground an obvious lack of urgency can be seen when that cannot be rectified. All of us here are more than willing to help, support and see that the commitments the Department makes are realised but Mr. McCarthy must elaborate on the 4,436 figure and break it down. He needs to elaborate, as the previous speaker stated, on the commitments regarding the 1,500 modular units. Where is the surplus over 22 units that was committed to last year? When can people expect to see results in this area? As far back as two and half years ago, the former Minister, Deputy Kelly, made similar commitments. I am sure the figures are similar to the commitment Deputy Kelly gave at that time and the same figures have been given repeatedly. Rather than taking up much more time, Mr. McCarthy should break down the 4,436 into units, into the children involved and into households. On the 1,500 modular units, what lessons have been learned from the failure last year and how can we be assured that these can be address this time round?

Photo of Victor BoyhanVictor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the team from the Department, and particularly thank the Secretary General, Mr. McCarthy, for his presentation. First, I want to put on the record it was disappointing that we did not have a presentation on the review of the action plan for housing and homelessness, which was originally scheduled for 7 December. Mr. McCarthy will recall we had a piece of correspondence from his Department on the reasons.

There is a national housing crisis. I read a piece by the Minister, to be fair to him, only two days ago in The Irish Times. It is another one of the pieces to which Deputy Ó Broin refers about the usual such as, for instance, the importance of joined-up responses, how in working together we can rebuild Ireland and the 47,000 units. I accept all of that.

The Minister got what he wanted. The Department got what it wanted. Ultimately, through their Minister, they got Rebuilding Ireland - Action Plan for Housing and Homelessness, which is Government policy and which we all are working to and agreed to. They got the necessary legislative support that was required to give effect to this plan and vision. That is a fact as is all good. As I stated at the first meeting I attended as a member of this committee, what the Minister did was a brave decision but there was only one way out. If he could not explain what he was doing, he was failing. He published at the back of the document specific dates and timelines.

Mr. McCarthy is talking about the first, second and third quarters in 2016. We are now in 2017 and Mr. McCarthy is only reporting on one element. This is so crucial the joint committee will need to have faster responses from the Department. I might as well say what I feel but it was an affront for the Department not to come before this committee when it was scheduled to so do to give a report on the Government policy. This is the Oireachtas joint committee and this is one of the key elements that will be considered throughout the work of this committee. I am conscious that the Chairman wants to deal with the different issues under the pillars, but that is merely an opening remark.

Clearly, coming from the previous speakers is the issue of the format. Why can we not have a standard format? Reading a speech is all very fine, but Mr. McCarthy set out his excellent format at the back of this document in which there are timelines, etc. We should have a format which is consistent through every report on this document, which sets out each of the items and objectives. We know how many objectives and items are in the report. There are 84 distinct actions under the five pillars. It is all clear and well done and is well set out. Arising from all of this and the ongoing discussion, I recommend that the format be established, that the Department have a proper working format which replicates the format of the Department in this document in order that members can constantly see how it is progressing.

We need to have greater details. Deputy Ó Broin talked about a metric. Also, there is an inconsistency on the data every time one reads a paper. The Department published the delightful Summary of Social Housing Assessments 2016 in December 2016, for which I thank the Department, as I rang up and was sent a copy the next day. The previous one was dated up to 2013. We had a housing crisis but we had no summary of the social assessment need until December 2016. I circulated the summary to a number of local authorities and had feedback from a senior level within these local authorities to the effect that there were inconsistencies about the figures, and I am happy to discuss that with Mr. McCarthy later. There are issues in this regard and these data need to be validated. There are inconsistencies in local authority chief executives saying it is something else and the Department stating these are the facts, people are falling off lists but no one really needs to know.

I will finish at that point. I will come back in at the various pillars, if I may. I make the point that we have to speed it up. What is Mr. McCarthy talking about? Are we talking about the last quarter, which is October, November and December 2016 or what? We need to be consistent with the quarter of when this was published because I would like to think that for every quarter in 2017, we will have a comprehensive report. The key point is the format of it. The format should be clearly set up against the format the Department established in its document.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will take three questions at a time, if that is okay with the committee.

Mr. John McCarthy:

I will start in reverse order, given the issues raised by Senator Boyhan.

To clarify, we have published a quarter 3 progress report in the same format as in Rebuilding Ireland, which was published on 1 November. That goes through each of the individual actions scheduled for delivery in quarter 3. It mirrors the format in the document and is the format in which we will continue to publish on a quarterly basis. The absence of a presentation earlier was on the understanding that the presentation, to a large measure, was contained in the published report so the purpose of my opening remarks was really just to try to give a summary of some of the key points.

On the issue before Christmas, I wrote to the committee and explained to the Chairman that the period before Christmas was an extraordinarily busy period for everybody concerned, including for committee members because the Houses were sitting for hours, day and night. We were in the throes of trying to finalise a very difficult rental strategy and big legislation, including the legislative amendments associated with the rental strategy. There is never any disrespect intended to the committee by the Department; we never have and, as long as I am Secretary General, we never will. The choice we faced was coming before the committee without some of the key people because they had to service other aspects of the Oireachtas in terms of legislation and Government business. It would not have been the most productive encounter for all of us. That is just by way of background to explain the pressures at the time. There was no intention to show disrespect towards the committee or its members.

In terms of the social housing assessments data, we are very keen to hear any suggestions or comments the committee has received about inconsistency. The appointed date for the social housing assessment 2016 was 21 September. The couple of months between that date and the date it was published were heavily devoted to a data cleansing and validation exercise that was undertaken by the Housing Agency. If there is a suggestion that there are data inconsistencies, it may be because some of the data shown has been cleansed from some of the initial data presented to us. We are happy to engage with the committee. If it has details on that, we will explore them. There is a commitment in the social housing strategy that social housing assessments, which were done every three years up to 2016, will not be undertaken on an annual basis.

In terms of homelessness and data, which Deputy Cowen raised, the figure I referred to of 4,436 was 4,436 adults. There were 2,549 children, so in total we are talking about 6,985, comprising 1,200 families. In terms of the target the Minister has set out clearly in Rebuilding Ireland, that target is to eliminate the use of commercial hotels for emergency accommodation by the middle of the year. In the most recent data available to us, there were about 700 families in commercial hotels in the Dublin region. The target we are working towards is getting that cohort of families living in unsustainable hotel accommodation out of that space by the middle of the year.

The rapid build programme was first spoken about in a demonstration project of different types of modular housing about 15 months ago in September-October 2015. We progressed quickly towards a pilot project in Ballymun. At the time, there were delays with the project partly associated with protests on site. In addition, we ran through some of the worst weather we had experienced over that December into January period. There was also an important amount of learning involved. One of the more significant pieces of learning was the extent to which time was being spent in the housing provider's manufacturing facility and the value associated with that. It meant that any issues arising as part of the construction of the units were dealt with at the earliest possible stage so that when they got on site, some of the issues that can arise when it comes to the actual assembly on site had been taken out. That is one of the significant learnings that came out of that pilot.

The Office of Government Procurement has put a lot of time and effort into putting a general procurement framework in place for rapid build housing. It is now thankfully in place and that will certainly assist local authorities in speeding up the procurement process as they move on with delivery over the course of this year. Apart from the 22 units that have been delivered, there were 131 units in four projects that were under construction in Dublin city at the end of the year. The remaining 200 were at various stages of procurement and will come on stream over the course of the year.

Deputy Cowen made an entirely valid point about my reference to the overall rapid build programme being completed by 2018 and how that gels with the mid-year target we have for hotels. We see the rapid build programme contributing towards meeting the mid-year target but we also see it as an ongoing delivery tool. The commitment to not use hotels other than in exceptional circumstances for emergency accommodation is one we are trying to meet by June but we need to continue to try to ensure we do not fall back into that space. The continued development of rapid build housing will assist over the remainder of 2017 and on into 2018 to help us to keep out of that unsustainable space. We will be organising a session with local authorities in the next ten days to two weeks. We have already had some discussions with local authorities outside the Dublin area in relation to projects that they will bring forward for rapid build purposes so the purpose of the engagement at the end of the month is to, in effect, identify the remaining projects that will contribute to get us to the point of having 1,000 units delivered by the end of this year and the remaining 520 in 2018. That covers the Deputy's points.

Deputy Ó Broin has made the point to the Minister about statistics and other areas of housing provision through Tusla and others. I also hear from what the Deputy is saying that he has difficulty getting that information from other quarters. All I can say is that we have put a lot of time over the past two years into getting the pathways to accommodation support system, PASS, in place to give us good statistics on homelessness so we have a very good handle on what we are dealing with as far as housing authorities are concerned. That has been our focus and the Minister has been clear that that has been our focus. I am not in any way arguing the point with the Deputy about the other areas of activity.

As part of the overall implementation of Rebuilding Ireland, we have a lot of engagement with the other bodies the Deputy has talked about, particularly Tusla, in terms of dealing with homelessness in the round. Responsibility for domestic violence issues was, with the establishment of Tusla, consciously moved away from our Department in the past 18 months to two years. We will continue to engage with it on what information and statistics it can bring to bear so that there is an overall picture of the accommodation being provided through different mechanisms. Generally, one of the things flowing from Rebuilding Ireland is that we are putting a renewed emphasis on the timeliness and the comprehensiveness of our statistics across a range of fronts on homelessness, social housing and broader housing market delivery more generally.

Over recent months, we have established a new unit, headed by a senior statistician, as part of the process of bringing greater clarity. A significant amount must be delivered under the Rebuilding Ireland programme. It is critically important everybody has a clear picture on where the state of delivery is at any time. That is a focus of particular attention for us.

We are certainly not in the business of choosing a particular time to put homelessness statistics out because we feel that, in some way, it will get buried by other news. That is not the business we are in. As I mentioned earlier about December, there were a significant number of other matters going on and the release of the statistics can get delayed from time to time. Again, as part of our statistical work and its presentation on our website, we are interested in transparency and getting the information out there.

The main contributors to exits from homelessness would be the homeless housing assistance payment pilot, which was successful last year in Dublin, and, obviously, mainstream housing allocations. To clarify, I may have given the wrong figure earlier for homelessness exits. I think I gave the figure 2,000 for last year which is actually the figure for the first three quarters of last year. The expectation is that for the year as a whole it will be 2,700.

On the two new emergency accommodation facilities, we engage in an ongoing dialogue with the four Dublin local authorities, in particular Dublin City Council, for which the Dublin Region Homeless Executive, DRHE, acts. We often meet weekly and fortnightly to discuss a range of issues. In all of those meetings, particularly in the early part of the autumn last year, the clear basis of our engagement with the local authorities was that, whatever needed to be put in place for additional emergency accommodation, we would support and fund the first three facilities which were put in place and launched in the second week of December. It brought us to a particular point and gave us sufficient comfort that there would be sufficient emergency accommodation for anybody who needed it. We always saw this as an ongoing process. The two new facilities - I do not know the date - arose in the context of that ongoing dialogue with the DRHE as part of the process of trying to be ahead of the issue rather than finding ourselves in a position of playing catch-up in providing accommodation for people in vulnerable circumstances.

On the length of time in emergency accommodation, as part of our improvement of our statistical work, we will talk to the DRHE to see if there is a way the PASS system can capture those sorts of data. On the allocations of rapid builds, we would certainly aim to be flexible with local authorities. Many competing factors go into the decision as to whether all the rapid build units should or should not be used for families in emergency accommodation. There may be local factors where a more blended approach is required. There are broader issues for each local authority in how they manage the prioritisation and the response to the priorities on their housing lists. If a local authority wants to talk to the Department about a measure of flexibility which it felt was necessary for good local reasons, we would certainly discuss that with it. We would not be in an absolute black and white space on this.

Photo of Grace O'SullivanGrace O'Sullivan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Action No. 1.19 stated the Government would work "with the Central Bank to ensure that the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears provides a strong consumer protection framework". Has there been any progress on this? Will the code of conduct be voluntary or will there be some mandatory mechanism?

Action No. 1.20 stated "We will request the Central Bank to conduct an assessment on existing sustainable restructuring solutions". Is there any report on this to date? Action No. 1.21 stated "We will examine how the Mortgage to Rent scheme can be improved to facilitate more households". Is there a report on this? It was due in the fourth quarter, as was the Central Bank assessment.

Mr. John McCarthy:

On action No. 1.19, the timeline is for the end of the quarter 1 this year and involves the Department of Finance and Central Bank. We will certainly be reporting on that as part of the quarterly progress report. As well as reporting on progress in the quarter just completed, we try to give a look ahead to some of the key deliverables in the quarter coming up. On action No. 1.2, we are compiling the quarter 4 progress report and getting inputs from the Department of Finance and the Central Bank. That will be published in the next two to three weeks and there will be an update on that at that stage.

We have pretty much completed the review on the mortgage-to-rent scheme but I have not yet had an opportunity to speak to the Minister about it. I hope the Deputy will forgive me for not going into too much detail on it but it is virtually complete. We have looked at all the suggested factors which have inhibited the take-up of the scheme. We are trying to see if there are ways we can put the householder more in the driving seat in getting access to the scheme. Again, I expect this will be finalised and we will be able to give more information in the quarter 4 progress report.

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Secretary General and his staff for attending the committee to update us on the first quarterly report on Rebuilding Ireland. We all recognise the significant challenge in this regard and we acknowledge the efforts being made across the various pillars.

My main interest is where progress has not been made, targets not met and to understand why that is the case. For example, the Secretary General outlined various construction programmes and how 21 local authorities have applied for funding under the €200 million local infrastructure fund to open up development plans. Do we have specific details as to which local authorities have applied and what development lands are under application? Why have local authorities which would have potential not submitted applications?

The construction of more than 2,800 housing units will be commenced by either local authorities or by approved housing bodies. Can we identify what local authorities or approved housing bodies have applied? Can we identify where there is further capacity? For the committee to be more beneficial to the whole Rebuilding Ireland project, it is important it engages with those local authorities or approved housing bodies to identify any barriers and assist them in making a more efficient application process and, in turn, completion process to deliver more units.

I also want to raise the issue of performance indicators, not only in local authorities but in the Department, regarding monitoring from application to approval to completion.

What progress has been made to make that whole process more efficient? As we all know, irrespective of who we represent, what party we are in or whether we are Independent, that there has been much criticism of the Department in terms of the approval system when applications are made, and in turn there has been criticism of local authorities that they are not efficient in driving their individual housing programmes. As a committee we can be more beneficial to the whole programme by scrutinising those processes, identifying where the problems are and seeing where we can assist in them. Any information the witnesses can give us in that respect will be helpful and I would appreciate it.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before the next speaker, I would like to clarify that I did not say at the start of the meeting that we would take this pillar by pillar. Deputy Ó Broin may want to ask his questions pillar by pillar, but he can come in as many times as he wants, and it is up to him to decide which pillar he wants to ask about or whether it is all five. There will be no curtailment of time on this.

Photo of Pat CaseyPat Casey (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to come back in on some of the issues that were raised, specifically in relation to pillar 1. A statistic was referred to that it is hoped to have 700 families out of commercial hotels by June this year. I would have some reservations as to how that will be achieved. One of the issues I would like to focus on is the Airbnb situation, specifically in Dublin. What processes have been put in place or directions given to local authorities to try to address the Airbnb situation, based on An Bord Pleanála's decision that anyone using a property for Airbnb on a long-term basis should have a change of use for the purposes of planning regulations? It has been identified that more than 1,500 properties are available in Dublin on Airbnb over a 50 week period in any year. These are homes that people could be living in. Equally, the federation has identified that 10% of the hotel stock is being taken up for local authority use within the Dublin area. It is a reversal of what should be happening. Tourists or business travellers should be staying in the hotel environment and families should be living in homes. I think that greater emphasis should be put on this now to try to address the situation.

I am slightly confused about the rapid build modular houses and whether they are specifically for homeless people. It was my understanding that we were looking at rapid build modular technology as the way forward in delivering social housing, and I think it was meant for anybody, not just for homeless people. If we restrict it to homeless people, we are actually saying that this is an inferior product. If we believe in modular building technology, in fairness to the people who are involved in the industry, the whole modular building concept is a way of moving this industry forward. Even from the employee's point of view, who has a regular place of work to go to on a daily basis to carry out their work, from child care and everything else, it is a lot easier manage their lifestyle balance.

To clarify, my questions concern the issue of families staying in commercial hotels, Airbnb and the rapid builds.

Photo of Jennifer Murnane O'ConnorJennifer Murnane O'Connor (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think many of the questions I was going to ask have already been mentioned. I would like more clarification on the pillars themselves. As I understand it, the figures and statistics are not available. That is crucial. I spent my whole Christmas trying to get people I represent into hotels and trying to get funding in my own area, and it was a massive issue for me. I will address that another time.

With regard to the €70 million allocated for purchasing house, how many have been purchased? What are the different areas? I understand that there is a crisis in Dublin and Galway and the bigger cities.

I read over the programme over Christmas, because I had a lot of dealings with many people over that period in this regard, and an issue that is not addressed is the staffing issue. The biggest issue in local authorities is the staffing issue. For example, people who want to go on the local authority housing list can be waiting from ten to 12 weeks. That is unacceptable. I believe that the Department should put in place a rule that nobody should be waiting longer than four weeks for a housing interview. That is leading to the most vulnerable people in our society not getting rent allowance or the housing assistance payment, HAP. That is a major issue.

We are talking about homelessness, and I think there are different types of homelessness. Over Christmas I had six families who were taken off the local authority housing list. I raised this issue with the Department six months ago. In my own local authority housing list area, there is a limit of 26,250. I could write the book on it at this stage. I have people who are being taken off the list. I had three families in particular who were eight years on the housing list, and because they were over the bracket, as it were, they were taken off. In neighbouring counties, the very same as in Carlow, they are allowed a limit of 30,000 or 32,000. That is not acceptable. The officials are not doing their homework. I can give them the names of six families today who were taken off the local authority housing list. They lost the rent allowance and they are now homeless. We are getting to a stage where unless the most vulnerable are addressed, people are starting to be taken off the housing list.

The other issue is the HAP, and I have to say that overall the HAP is a good scheme. I would be agree with it in that people can declare exactly how much they are paying to the landlord, whereas for years that was a disaster. Many landlords, however, do not seem to want to accept the HAP, and I believe it is because there is a mismatch in the information they are receiving. They feel that it is different to the rent allowance, which it is. It is better, but they do not understand that. Another area where the Department officials are falling down, as it were, is that people are refusing to accept the HAP. The local authorities will say that landlords are not accepting the HAP. One of the reasons is that in this new HAP scheme, and this comes back again to staffing levels, there are supposed to be call outs to make sure the homes are up to a proper standard. While that is good and we need a proper standard, there is no one to implement it. There are not enough staff and no one is able to do it.

I read through the action plan over the Christmas when I had so many people going into bed and breakfast accommodation and hotels. It just does not make sense to me that there is a programme in place, and while I know the Department officials are doing their best, the most vulnerable people are not being catered for. These are not the homeless, but they are next to the homeless. What I am finding is that these people are starting to become homeless.

While the new help to buy scheme is a good scheme, there are no new houses in most rural areas for first-time buyers. We have brought in a help to buy scheme for people who must be a first-time buyer or engaging in a first-time build. We have no houses for them. I promoted this scheme in our local newspapers and I was on the radio about it. I was delighted to praise this scheme. People came back to me to say they did not know where there was a first-time house to buy. They could not buy because there were no first-time builds. I told them to look for a mortgage from the local authority. Local authority mortgages are an issue that must be addressed. There is a lack of information about them and they have not been promoted well enough. The Department should promote these mortgages through every local authority. There needs to be a system in place for the people who are refused a loan or mortgage from a bank or building society because of the rules that are there and they do not qualify, which that is fair enough, but who also do not qualify for the local authority housing list. The help to buy scheme is fine in bigger areas like Dublin, Cork and Limerick where they are building, but there are no new builds in rural counties. There are no new houses. This means people will not qualify for it while the local authorities are not promoting mortgages. These are simple things, but if the Department addresses these in its plan it will make a big difference to the most vulnerable families in society. That is where the plan is failing.

The issues I raise are not major but the one I really want an answer on is the need to change the income limit for local authority housing from €26,500 to €32,000. As I said, I will give the witnesses the six names because those people are now homeless.

Mr. John McCarthy:

With regard to the first point Senator Coffey raised on the local infrastructure housing activation fund, my colleague, David Walsh, might update him on that.

Mr. David Walsh:

As the Senator knows, 21 local authorities submitted a total of 74 projects. The reason some local authorities decided not to was because we were trying to prioritise and identify large-scale developments that would need to be released early, we set a threshold of 500 units in Dublin and 200 around the country. Being realistic, the other timeline meant that they would deliver houses in three to four years.

Most of the local authorities came to our information sessions in the Custom House where we discussed this with them but some of them felt that even if they put a lot of work into it, they probably would not be able to deliver at the pace required. That said, the total value of the 74 projects we received in the middle of October was almost €800 million and we have a €200 million fund, so there has been a good deal of analysis and further engagement with local authorities asking them to prioritise and get behind some of the figures, understanding the phasing elements. That analysis is continuing. Any project over €5 million requires a fuller financial analysis, whether a multi-criteria analysis, MCA, or, in some cases, a full cost benefit analysis. That engagement and information flow is still happening but we believe we will find substantial and significant projects that can be funded this year, and we will kick-start major developments in some key sites.

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So none has been approved.

Mr. David Walsh:

As things stand, nothing has been approved yet.

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When does Mr. Walsh expect approvals to start?

Mr. David Walsh:

We are still getting further information from local authorities who are providing MCAs. The deadline for providing those was this month because it requires, in some cases, further detailed analysis. In terms of projects below €5 million, we are looking at the holistic amount and asking if we can make decisions on some of the smaller-scale projects in advance of approval. There are pros and cons to that in terms of assigning money before all the projects in the mix have been assessed. A portion was not set aside for smaller projects. When we get the full analysis in we will determine how quickly we can turn around the information. We have been engaging with and inviting in local authorities to update them and explain what they can do from their perspective, but 21 out of 31 is a good turnaround for what is a first call.

Mr. John McCarthy:

The Senator also raised the issue of our approval process. He will know from previous experience that there is much said about that and a lot of bouncing of the ball around between the local authority and the Department. All of us in the Department are fully alive to the reality of the very difficult housing situation we face and we are making every effort possible to move things forward more quickly, and we will continue to do that. However, we have to remember that in many cases we are talking about very large amounts of public funds for which, as Accounting Officer, I am ultimately accountable. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has frameworks in place with which we have to comply. Previously, there would have been a process that, technically, might have required eight or nine stages. That has been sweated down to four stages.

With regard to smaller-scale projects up to €2 million or 15 units, a one stage approval process has been introduced. It has not got a huge take-up from local authorities. In Rebuilding Ireland - Action Plan for Housing and Homelessness, we committed to reviewing the four stage approval process to see if there was anything further we could do in terms of making it operate more smoothly. That report is almost finished. The report will deal with a number of issues including clarity on what is required. It is an issue that what is required to move a project on is not fully understood in some cases, and that can be a cause of delay.

Are there standard approaches that can be taken? For example, standard approaches to internal layouts in housing can form layout templates that can be used as a straightforward part of projects.

With regard to turnaround timeframes between the four stages, I would like us to be in a situation where we can agree with local authorities on target timeframes but, inevitably, that requires a clear understanding of what is required because if we do not get what is required, we will not be in a position to be able to deliver on those timeframes. We will also look to see whether there is scope to streamline the first two stages of the process and move things on.

There are a large number of projects within the four stage approval process and we will be finalising an update on those for publication with the Q1 report, many of which have completed all four stages and are either on site or at tender. A significant number of other projects are in the pre-tender stage.

Projects are moving through the pipeline but we are committed to exploring every possible way to ensure that between ourselves and the local authorities, the system works as efficiently as possible. To help that, a more focused, multi-diciplinary team from the Department will engage with each individual local authority to talk about projects even before they become projects, if that does not sound stupid, to ensure there is a good understanding of where the local authority is coming from and what will be the likely issues in order to expedite delivery.

Deputy Casey raised the Airbnb issue. We addressed that in the rental strategy published before Christmas. There were two elements to that, one of which was the immediate implications of the An Bord Pleanála ruling. That was on a specific case where, in effect, an apartment was being used exclusively for Airbnb purposes. The An Bord Pleanála ruling was that that use requires planning permission. We issued guidance to all local authorities before Christmas bringing that ruling to their attention. In the event that there are other properties operating in a similar manner, they require planning permission and need to be followed up.

On the Airbnb issue more generally, while a significant number of Airbnb properties may be advertised in any location at a particular time, what is not as clear is the extent to which some of those are being offered by people who are making their property available for a week or two when they are on holidays themselves. There is a big gulf between the numbers of units available in Airbnb and the numbers of units available for housing generally because they are and continue to be people's primary residences. We have recognised in the rental strategy that there are a range of issues flowing from the An Bord Pleanála case and Airbnb generally, including issues to do with tenancy regulation, tax liability and the tourism dimension. There is a commitment in the rental strategy to establish a working group to prepare a report on that by the second quarter of this year. We will be moving forward with that very shortly.

I could not agree more with the Deputy's point about rapid build. Rapid build housing has been brought forward because of its capacity to deliver projects faster in order to be able to assist in dealing with the immediate issues of homelessness but, fundamentally, we are talking about new and different types of building technologies. There is considerable scope for those technologies to be able to deliver us a good quality product in faster timelines at competitive prices. The engagement we are having with local authorities is with a view to building up the portfolio to deliver us the 1,500 units we have referred to in the programme but if a local authority wants to take forward any social housing project employing any one of these new technologies, we will certainly look at it.

Obviously, there are building standards that these new technologies have to meet. We are not in the business of delivering a less than proper product. However, as a principle, I agree fully with the Deputy.

On the issues Senator Jennifer Murnane O'Connor raised, there are always staffing issues in every organisation. We have staffing issues and have to prioritise and use our staffing resources in the best possible way. As part of the process of assisting local authorities, we have provided for certain staff costs associated with our capital programmes to be covered in order that they do not have to find the resources to meet them. Fundamentally, there is a requirement on every organisation to prioritise, our own included, and we have had to do this in delivering Rebuilding Ireland, the rental strategy and getting on with the important business of implementation. We have to prioritise and try to use our resources in different ways.

On income limits, different bands are set for different areas and there is an entire process behind it. The ultimate impact of the income bands is that they operate to target the most vulnerable. There can be much debate on whether it should be at this, that or the other level, but at whatever level they are set, by targeting the households with an income below them, by definition the most vulnerable households are being targeted.

We have rolled out the HAP scheme to all local authorities, bar those in Fingal, Dún Laoghaire and Dublin city, where it will be rolled out on 1 March. The scheme has been working for the purpose of dealing with homelessness in Dublin generally. We had a target of 12,000 tenancies last year which was achieved. The feedback from local authorities is generally quite positive, as the Senator acknowledged. We do receive feedback from local authorities that there are some tenants who believe the scheme is not the solution for them and it is for an individual household to form its own view. However, we are working towards ensuring the scheme delivers quality accommodation. All such accommodation, if it has not been inspected within the previous 12 months, has to be inspected within eight months and the issue of the standard of private rental accommodation is the focus of particular attention in the rental strategy. There are issues with some landlords in understanding the HAP scheme, but, overall, it has reached the take-up by landlords and tenants envisaged in the targets set for last year. As part of the further roll-out of the scheme to the remaining Dublin local authorities, we will be engaging with at least some local authorities on a further promotional campaign for both tenants and landlords to ensure there is the level of understanding needed.

I will be brief on the help to buy scheme because it is not in our space but in that of the Department of Finance. The Senator made an interesting point about the fact that while there was help to buy, there was very little house building in her area. The rationale for the help to buy scheme is that it has been introduced in response to a suggestion that there is a lack of confidence in the home building sector about the extent to which there is a mortgage-ready pool of purchasers available, if I can put it that way, and that this been holding back supply. One can look at it as a case of the chicken and the egg, but, certainly, the help to buy scheme has been advanced on the basis that it will have a positive impact on supply. I take the Senator's point that there may be a timelag, but it has been designed to be a supply enhancing mechanism.

The level of activity on local authority mortgages has been low in recent times. Again, going back to the Senator's point, perhaps that is not surprising if there is a lack of supply, which, of course, there is. That is the fundamental underlying problem with which we are trying to deal in Rebuilding Ireland. Nonetheless, the local authority mortgage system has to be operated in a very careful and prudent way. We do not want local authorities to get into the space of what might previously have been called sub-prime lending, giving rise to mortgage arrears issues down the road. For somebody to be able to avail of a local authority mortgage, there is a requirement that he or she be able to show he or she has been refused a mortgage by two other financial institutions. After that, there is a credit policy in place which has to be satisfied. When one looks at the profile of the local authority mortgage book versus the private mortgage book, the incidence of arrears in the local authority mortgage book is significantly higher than it is for private institutions. Therefore, potentially there is a lesson to be learned about whether the rules and criteria in advancing mortgages were what they should have been in the past. There has certainly been a new credit policy in place for the past few years and it will have to continue to apply.

Photo of Jennifer Murnane O'ConnorJennifer Murnane O'Connor (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To clarify, the Department has brought forward the new tenant purchase scheme under which local authority tenants can purchase their home. A lot of people have come to tell me that they are going to the banks but that they are not getting the money from them. Because the new scheme has been brought forward recently after years without it, the Department needs to put a system in place because the local authority tenant who has been offered a house needs help to buy it. As he or she is in a position to pay for it, it is the scheme that is wrong. Will the Department look at these issues because they will come up more in the next year? I believe it will start this year, but it will be a bigger issue next year.

Mr. John McCarthy:

The new tenant purchase scheme has only been in operation for one year. We said that after its first 12 months in operation we would conduct a review and that review was launched last week. There is a public consultation process and the review is to be finished by the end of the first quarter.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am interested in what was said by Deputy Pat Casey about rapid build and modular housing. Mr. McCarthy gave the impression that these units were of high standard. I am sure we have all been approached - I have - by people who provide these modular homes and they look perfectly good to me. I do not know why there has been such a huge delay. This irritates me, given that we are all talking about the crisis, yet, when we there is a rapid build solution, it does not happen. There is something wrong in the system, given that it delivered houses for decades. There seems to be a huge inability to get started or have anything delivered. Many of us were very critical about this during the debate on the evictions Bill last night. We have had various announcements of funding by several Ministers in this and the last two Governments, yet the local authorities state they have no money. I am delighted that Mr. McCarthy said the process had been reduced from eight or nine stages to four, but four is still too many. I acknowledge that he said it was down to one or two stages for smaller projects, but there are still too many stages. He also said the Department wanted to consider having a common internal layout. We have screaming for this for years. Every time my council in County Tipperary wanted to build four houses in any village, it had to tender for architects to engage in design and procurement. Surely we can have designs for one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom, four-bedroom and even five-bedroom units and then adapt them. Of course, there will be site and infrastructural issues, but, other than this, there should be a standard design.

There is a whole industry developing around architects and design for which there is no need and which must be cut out. It is jobs for the boys in the industry, as far as I am concerned. It is slowing down the entire process. These are standard houses. Once they are up to standard, they should be supported.

We ask about the voluntary sector. Mr. Walsh said 21 out of 31 authorities have applied for this special fund. I ask that members - me in any event - be provided with a list of them so that we know which ones did not apply. I would also like to see similar figures for the voluntary sector. I was very involved in the voluntary sector and I still am to a certain extent. We were able to build a 14-bed scheme in a small rural community in 1996. We had people in the houses within three years of our first meeting. We were a group of laypersons. There was not one professional in the group. We had to hire in professional expertise and we did so. At the time to which I refer, the county council was building a scheme for the elderly in the same field. It ended up having 17 steps and parts to it. We did not have one step in our project. The county council's scheme took six years to build, with four different builders - all supervised by the council - involved. The thing is rotten. It is not working. The Secretary General must sit up and take note. I am glad to see he is present. It is just not happening. The county council tells us that it does not have the staff, which is true, but those involved will have to do a bit more as well, to be fair. There is lethargy and ineptitude. It is not acceptable to have to wait for so long in a crisis.

Mr. McCarthy mentioned the commercial hotels and said the Department wants to see their use as emergency accommodation stopped and 700 families removed from them. On the day on which the announcement in this regard was made in the Dáil, I was contacted by a developer in Dublin who told me the Department had bought a hotel that was for sale for that very reason. One arm does not seem to know what the other is doing. It appears to be absolute bedlam and chaos. It is not functioning - full stop. I am sorry to be so critical but that is my position. I agree 100% with what Senator Murnane O'Connor said about families being removed from housing lists. I know families that spent seven or eight years on housing waiting lists and then, because they went over the limit by a little, they were removed. This was despite all the effort they make to be included on the main list and on the four-month waiting list and all the trauma they underwent. More than 3,000 people are approved in Tipperary, a rural county.

Then there are individuals who want to build houses and have a few bob and couples who want to settle down and have their money and site secured. They cannot get planning permission because local authorities are too rigid. It is a real dog-in-the-manger job. The county council, supervised by the Department, will not let them build and the Department will not build. We will have to cut out all these stages. The voluntary sector, at the time I was talking about, had one unit in the Department with which it could deal. Before that, there were three or four. Then it was cut down to one. Do the witnesses know exactly how many different sections of the Department the voluntary groups have to deal with? It is frustrating. There are voluntary groups that have the capacity, enthusiasm and energy to build and they will and can do it. They get local buy-in from people and get sites at better prices than local authorities. The latter see every problem as the glass being half empty, whereas the glass is well over half full for private individuals who can do it because they are left to do it.

There is an awful lot of unshackling to be done. There are too many jobs, too many conferences and too much HSE jargon. I heard one of the witnesses talk about some kind of special group the Department set up to talk to local authorities. I made a note of it. It is definitely HSE jargon, and this contagion has spread throughout all the Departments. It is a matter of pushing paper backward and forward and sweet Fanny Adams happening. That is my honest position. I am involved in construction and I know a bit about this matter. I know that modular units can be built on site and that this can be done by private people, but we cannot do it. We have all the strategies in the world but they are little good to people.

Then there are the evictions - the banks and the competitive aspect on the other side - whereby people are being dispossessed. We saw yesterday that hundreds of farmers will face repossession because of another vulture fund. More people are facing the housing crisis. We were playing catch-up in any event but we will now be at a standstill or near standstill. I could count on my fingers the number of houses built in Tipperary in the past three or four years. I asked the Minister before Christmas, during the debate about rent control, to call in the county managers, make them accountable and say, "Come on lads, for God's sake. We're at this for a number of years. What the hell is going on?" They are not held accountable. It is not happening. I am not being personally critical of any of the witnesses, but the system has become badly contaminated and is not working. There is no efficiency. As I said, voluntary groups are being starved.

The tenant purchase scheme was a disaster. I think three were approved in my county in the last scheme. That is not happening either. How come every scheme that is introduced just does not happen? Then there is NAMA, which recently told us it offered 1,600 units to councils. I went about checking this out and I am confused at this stage. We had letters back from NAMA, from my local authority - which was in a panic - and from the Housing Agency. It is just a paper trail that we are all justifying. Figures have been bandied about and people and families are being completely neglected. We are part of it because we are responsible for holding the system accountable, but it is not accountable. In fact, it has not been accountable for a long time.

Photo of Barry CowenBarry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have one specific question. The witnesses may have touched on it already in so far as they have elaborated on the commitments made in the document last year about the establishment of new teams within the Department to work closely with local authorities in order to try to fast-track house-building. I tabled a parliamentary question some weeks ago to seek details of what might have been approved last year alone, whether in the first half of the year under Deputy Alan Kelly's previous magnificent plan or the new Rebuilding Ireland document produced in July. I did so with a view to seeing how this acceleration was working or whether there was evidence on the ground identifying the urgency that we know, feel and see by virtue, as previous speakers, particularly my colleague in Carlow, have alluded to in our clinics when we meet and converse with constituents around our constituencies. They are at their wits' end in an effort to see this urgency before their eyes, which, unfortunately, they do not see. The Minister, in response, said to refer to the Department's website, which identifies the figures. Looking at the figures I have since got from the website, from January 2015 to date, there have been 591 new schemes for approved housing bodies and 2,775 for local authorities. I did not get a specific breakdown for 2016. Mr. McCarthy then says that up to about 2,700 will move towards construction this year. I know that he must qualify his remarks and use terms such as "move towards", but with the help of God these houses will proceed to construction. This frightens me because it would seem to indicate - Mr. McCarthy can correct me if I am wrong and can prove that to be the case also- that there do not seem to have been any new approvals in 2016.

I am conscious that we are informed that the eight stages of the approval process have been reduced to four. Much of what is contained in the figures I have acquired relates to schemes that might even predate 2015. In my county, for example, two schemes for 60 houses were approved over two years ago and no ground has been broken yet. People are watching these proceedings or they will read the record of the debate afterward. We are merely trying to tease out where the problems and issues lie so that we can seek to have them resolved. Our duty and responsibility is to act properly and effectively with the massive amount of funds that have been put before us, which I acknowledge and do not dispute. I want this to succeed and I want Rebuilding Ireland to succeed. We all want to see progress and to be in a position whereby in 12 months' time we can collectively acknowledge that progress has been made with the Minister with responsibility at the helm. I have no problem with that. We can play politics some other day. We fight elections whenever we have to on the issues of the day. However, this is the greatest emergency facing the country and we must deal with it urgently by means of an evidence-based approach. I do not see evidence-based figures and statistics before me that I can relay to those constituents whom I meet weekly and for whom I cannot outline any progress. It is hugely frustrating and annoying and deeply disturbing that these people are attending my clinics - I am sure the position is the same for other members - and I cannot show the urgency I think is necessary and I would hope to see in the context of replies to parliamentary questions I have tabled. Could the witnesses clarify the new projects, proposals or developments that were approved last year and that are proceeding? If they cannot, I ask them to make the information available to me as soon as possible.

If there are only 2,700 this year, and the plan refers to 1,000 to 3,000 up to 2018 and increasing to 5,000 in the years thereafter to 2021, there should be many more in these responses on the website, if it were to reflect the urgency and the effort that is being made. As Deputy Mattie McGrath said, let us analyse who is and is not performing and let us start holding people to account to ensure the progress that is sought is made.

Photo of Victor BoyhanVictor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My questions will deal specifically with the Secretary General's opening statement. Before that, in my earlier remarks I referred to the meeting of 7 December last. I accept the Secretary General's response. I have no problem with it and I am glad he explained it.

Mr. McCarthy stated with regard to pillar 2: "While the final detailed figures for social housing output will be collated and published over the coming weeks, provisional figures for 2016 indicate that in excess of 18,300 households have had their social housing needs met under the range of social housing schemes, ahead of the target...". There are 31 local authorities in the country. It would be helpful for us to have the figures for 2016 when they are finally collated. These are the hard facts we must deal with and the figures are evidence based. Perhaps Mr. McCarthy would do that.

Mr. McCarthy also mentioned, and Senator Coffey raised this issue, that "On the infrastructure front, 21 local authorities have applied for funding under the €200 million local infrastructure housing activation fund, LIHAF, ..." and he went on to outline the information on that. We also heard from Mr. Walsh that 74 projects were involved. Senator Coffey's question was not answered. What 21 of the 31 local authorities are involved? Can we have details on that? This is the type of detail that local councillors will contact us about when they are seeking to find out the position, because they hear various things. We must make more facts available. There are 31 councils in the country and 21 were involved, so perhaps we could have those facts.

Mr. Walsh made a good and important point about the cost-benefit analysis of this. I have no problem with, or ideological hang ups about, private developers but we are talking about private developers seeking this money. They talk about it publicly and we know private developers in our constituencies who are seeking this money. However, we must be careful about using public funds to assist and support private development over and above local authority or co-operative development. It is an important issue. There is a major strategic development zone, SDZ, in south County Dublin that may or may not seek some of this money. We must be careful. It would be wholly appropriate that a full cost-benefit analysis be carried out in this regard because this is public money and we have a public housing list and social obligations. Perhaps the Secretary General would provide us with the list of 21 local authorities involved.

Regarding the Secretary General's progress report that accompanied the papers we received today, pillar 3 refers to building more homes. One of the actions behind schedule is No. 3.8: "We will develop and publish an implementation plan to prioritise implementation of key recommendations within the An Bord Pleanála review". The An Bord Pleanála review has been completed. Can the Secretary General explain the delay? If something is behind schedule, there should be another column to explain how it will be brought back on schedule. Will this be dealt with fully in the next quarter?

Finally, with regard to pillar 4, there is another action, No. 4.6, behind schedule. It states: "We will introduce a new affordable rental scheme to enhance the capacity of the private rented sector to provide quality and affordable accommodation for households currently paying a disproportionate amount of disposable income on rent." That is one of the key issues debated in the legislation, but again it is behind schedule. Will the Secretary General give the reasons for it being behind schedule and, more importantly, explain how he will get it back on schedule? If this committee is to be successful in terms of scrutiny, we must work together. This is not a case of any of us being against each other. I echo the point Deputy Cowen made in that I, too, would be delighted if this could be delivered. This is the Government's policy. It is being funded and supported by the Oireachtas, so there is great consensus on it being delivered. We wish to be helpful on these matters, so perhaps the Secretary General will elaborate on the questions I raised.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I note the importance of the LIHAF funding. Senator Boyhan identified the Cherrywood SDZ, with which I am very familiar. It has the potential to yield 7,700 units, which demonstrates the importance of the LIHAF fund. I invite Mr. McCarthy to respond.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If I may intervene, Mr. McCarthy referred to a multidisciplinary team. My goodness, where have we had that? I shudder at the term.

Mr. John McCarthy:

I better be careful with my use of words. I am not in the business of using jargon. The Deputy may interpret it that way, but it is certainly not intended as such. We are in the business of ensuring we have an integrated interaction with local authorities. I do not wish to have people going to visit local authorities with half of the team and then having to return for another interaction with the other half. That is the purpose of it and if the labelling is offensive, it is not intended-----

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If they get the job done, we will all be fine and there will be no complaints.

Deputy Pat Casey took the Chair.

Mr. John McCarthy:

Absolutely and, as I said at the outset, our focus is on working with local authorities, approved housing bodies and all of the stakeholders that have a role to play in delivering on this plan for us.

I will deal with the questions in reverse order. In response to Senator Boyhan, where any actions in a quarterly progress report are delayed, the intention is that we would give an update on those in the following progress report. There were five or six actions in the third quarter reports that were delayed and we will give an update on all of those in the next quarterly report in the next few weeks. I believe they are almost all done. The Senator mentioned the An Bord Pleanála action, in particular. That implementation plan has been published and is on the Department's website. There is no problem with providing the Senator with the list of the 21 local authorities that have applied for funding under the LIHAF.

Regarding Deputy Cowen's points about ramping up progress, in an earlier response I referred to all of the projects that are in the system at present. When something gets approved at stage 1 it must go through the design and procurement process to get it to construction and to get boots on the ground. Over the course of 2016 projects would have moved through that approval process very extensively. We will publish a list of all the projects - we are currently updating it - and their position in the various stages. We will publish that on our website and send a copy to the committee at the same time. To give the Deputy a sense of the activity ramping up, in 2016 just over 50 construction projects with approximately 700 units would have started construction on site. On site starts, on the basis of the progress of projects to date and the work that local authorities will carry out, we estimate there will be approximately 200 projects with 2,800 units starting on site this year.

With the progressive ramping up from last year to this year, it demonstrates a significant uptick.

Photo of Barry CowenBarry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The witness alluded to my point in his commentary before giving the figures. For us to fully recognise the improvements he states are taking place, we must see on a quarterly basis figures such as those, with details of stages. We had eight stages and that is down to four. I have yet to be convinced that the four stages will happen twice as quickly as the eight stages. I must see that in black and white to have confidence in the system.

Mr. John McCarthy:

We will finalise that stage-by-stage summary shortly, publish it and make it available to the committee as well. We are on the same page as Deputy Mattie McGrath with regard to standard layouts. He indicated he has been approached by contractors with regard to the rapid build process.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. John McCarthy:

We are working through the Office of Government Procurement to attract and give the industry a sense of the level of ambition. There has been much work over the course of 2016 and the framework has been in place since just before Christmas. I am sure some of the people mentioned by the Deputy may very well have participated in that process.

The Deputy indicated that when he spoke with local authorities they reported they have no funding. The funding for housing has increased very significantly. Last year it increased to €940 million across the country for housing and this year it is going up to €1.3 billion. We have given a very clear message to local authorities that we are in the business of progressing projects as expeditiously as we can. There is an overall commitment of €5.5 billion under the Rebuilding Ireland plan up to 2021, so there is forward visibility for local authorities that commitment to funding exists to get projects delivered. That is the business we are in and it is the business we want all local authorities to be in.

Deputy Maria Bailey resumed the Chair.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The process takes forever. If they send something to the Department, it takes six months to get it back. It would take six months to send it again. It is pathetic. It is what they have told me.

Mr. John McCarthy:

If the submission coming to us from the local authority-----

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It takes six months to get an answer.

Mr. John McCarthy:

If the Deputy can get examples of that from the local authority, I certainly would be anxious to explore them. Equally, I have had a number of cases presented to me about issues stuck in the Department. In one case it was said something was stuck in the Department for six years but when I explored the issue I found an initial application came in six years beforehand but there was no money for it and the local authority was told that. There were other examples of contact and there were responses to local authorities within days about issues. I am not saying the system is perfect, as it is far from it, and we will continue to work to make it better. The local authorities will be required to work with us as part of that.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

May I comment briefly on that?

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are running tight on time and Deputy Coppinger has not yet contributed. Deputy Ó Broin also has a number of questions.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It will be a short comment.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You may have ten seconds.

Photo of Mattie McGrathMattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is a problem. The witness and I are public servants, as are the councillors, so somebody is kidding somebody else. It should not happen that six years after the fact people do not know what problem existed. It is a shameful admission.

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is the second or third review meeting but we have ended up with the same difficulty. That is not a criticism of the officials. We have discussed one and a half pillars so the next review-----

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are discussing all of them and we will go to weekly meetings.

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not criticising anybody but we will need more time for the next review. On the Airbnb issue, yesterday there were 1,500 properties available to rent in Dublin on the market and 6,500 properties on the Airbnb website. I know a large number are for short letting but a very large number are for long-term letting. My worry is that if the working group only reports back in the second quarter, we are really only looking at regulations for September, October or November. Is there any way the working group can be brought forward or the gap between the report and regulations could be sped up? It is an urgent issue in terms of supply.

I am sure Ms Mary Hurley is pulling out her hair with regard to the approval process. I will make a comparison. We rushed through very substantial and controversial legislation to fast-track the private sector planning process because of an 84-week delay. The very first Part 8 provisions I voted on at South Dublin County Council in 2013 were for 11 houses and they have still not been built. It is 160 weeks since we voted on that planning permission. I know that is an extreme case but I do not get the sense, whether it is from the Minister or officials, of the same urgency in tackling the considerable delay in the four-stage process as we got we got with the private sector 100-unit plus proposal. I share everybody's frustration. I do not care who is responsible and this is not really about blaming the officials or local authorities. This needs an urgent solution, as waiting 160 weeks for 11 houses is just insane. I am sure Ms Hurley would be the first to say that privately. We need some movement on that.

The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, confirmed in a reply to a parliamentary question from Deputy Pearse Doherty before Christmas that AIB and Permanent TSB were making available two blocks of properties totalling 1,000 vacant units to the Housing Agency, clearly in response to the agency's €70 million fund. The Minister confirmed that money for 200 of those units has been approved. I have asked the Minister responsible for housing, Deputy Coveney, twice in parliamentary questions why funding has been made available for only 200 and he has evaded the answer twice. If we are looking at rapid build and emptying 700 families from hotels, if there are 1,000 vacant units not on the private market - so they are not competing with first-time buyers - why are we not buying them? Perhaps some are not suitable or they are too expensive. Maybe some are in the wrong place. The committee should get a list or some information on this so we have a clear explanation on the issue.

I would like an update, whether in writing after the meeting or here, on the National Treasury Management Agency, NTMA, funding for social housing under the plan and the ongoing debacle of the Irish League of Credit Unions. I know it is not primarily stuck in the Department but any information would be useful. On the housing needs assessment, we have had a 30% drop from the figures that local authorities were giving to a number of us through freedom of information requests in May last year to the September deadline. In my local authority there was a 40% drop on the number of people on the list. It cannot be the case that 40% of the 9,000 households under South Dublin County Council had housing needs met between May and September. Some have gone to the housing assistance payment and some have fallen foul of the stricter application of the financial threshold, which was wrongly applied much more strictly this time around. Dublin City Council has given until 31 March for people to contact the council to try to rectify any unfair removal from the list. Is that a Dublin City Council issue or could a note be sent to all local authorities to say they should apply that measure? This has been the single largest drop in the housing list seen in any recent housing needs assessment and I am very worried about it.

I have other questions but I will submit them as parliamentary questions. We need a separate and dedicated meeting on the 29 actions in private rental strategy as we have not had a substantive debate about it. If it gets mushed into the next quarterly review, we will not deal with it. I hope we can facilitate a dedicated discussion on that before the end of February.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Coppinger was not here at the start but I remind her that all five pillars are being discussed because they overlap.

Photo of Ruth CoppingerRuth Coppinger (Dublin West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for being late as there was a community event in my area I had to attend. I hope I will not repeat what others have said and will try to focus on the social housing pillar. Homelessness is an international problem and is evident in every country. A baby died on the streets in Portland, Oregon, which is in the richest country on the planet, and homelessness is at a phenomenal level there. The root of the problem is the aversion to public home building compared with the 1970s, 1980s and previously.

From looking at the figures the poverty of ambition is incredible if one considers that we have a housing emergency. The best-case scenario is 2,800 public houses, according to Mr. Walsh's presentation. I also cannot get over why it is not targeted. We know where the homeless crisis is worse and I am getting tired of saying this. If one looks at the figures for the area breakdown for the first nine months of 2016 - figures which went very quietly up onto the website yesterday by the way - 42 social housing units were completed in the Dublin City Council area. We know the homeless crisis is everywhere but as it is actually focused in particular parts of Dublin, why is the Department not targeting the key black spots with a huge amount of social housing and other measures? There have been 36 units completed in Fingal. I was a member of the local authority in Fingal for 11 years. There are 200 families in emergency accommodation in that area at present and another 98 families - as far as I know - who are homeless but not in emergency accommodation. Approximately 300 of the 760 families who are homeless are in Fingal and yet a paltry amount of houses are targeted to be built there and not one in the greater Blanchardstown area, where I guarantee most of the 300 families are from. Can someone from the Department explain that please? Fingal County Council has two sites left in the Blanchardstown area where a lot of the housing crisis is. Some 40% of the homeless in Dublin are from Dublin West. I and other Deputies get a lot of visits from them. There are two sites and they have not even been developed. I would like a written case study, by a Department representative here, as to why not. The 20 modular houses in Wellview were talked about 13 months ago. The area is the most deprived area of the constituency and now modular houses are being lumped in. I am not going to oppose them as anything is better than nothing - but where are they? Let us stop calling them rapid build because that is a bit a joke at this stage. They are not so rapid houses. It was 13 months ago and where are they? Of the two sites, a plan for Church Road was brought before the council, again I believe it was more than one year ago, and there is still no sign of any houses. There is one site left beside Wellview, which is called lands north of Wellview. Could the witnesses investigate why Fingal County Council has not bothered its barney developing that site when it has a homeless epidemic all around it?

I do not like blaming the council or officials. Political decisions are made but the councils are telling us that the Department is telling them there is no shortage of money. We know the tender process is a big problem - not the planning process per se but the fact that it must be put out to tender and this delays some of the process. I believe that people should have an answer as to why, in the homeless black spot in Dublin, there has not been a house built by the council in years - since I was on the council actually. Why have those two sites not been fast-tracked and moved? I would have thought that if the Department wanted its figures to go up, it would target where the need is greatest. Cork city has had one council house provided in the whole of the first nine months on 2016. There have been 20 units built in South Dublin County Council and 16 in Limerick. I feel for the departmental representatives as I would hate to be coming before this committee because that is an embarrassment, given the scale of the problem. Last night the Minister said it takes time to build houses and yet, my point is, that the available sites are not even being developed by the council.

The other key problem we have is that NAMA, which is State run, is selling off so much land at the moment to vulture funds. This is land that would definitely be needed. If one considers the greater Blanchardstown area, which is the fastest growing area of the last ten or 15 years, the council sites are minuscule at this point. It is, therefore, only with NAMA that we could build enough houses in the area. NAMA is building lovely mansions up in Castleknock that are unaffordable to the vast majority. In one deal in December 2015, a US vulture fund called Lone Star Funds bought 20% of the residential development land in Dublin. That is absolutely incredible given that Ireland has a housing emergency. The sites were €19,000 and now they are being sold for €100,000. Nothing is being done by the Government to stop the vulture funds buying up all the valuable land that we could have used for social and affordable housing.

With regard to the homelessness figures two different accounts were given on the "Tonight with Vincent Browne" programme in on 4 January. The Minister for State with responsibility for housing and urban renewal, Deputy Damien English said "... by June next year there will be nobody living in emergency accommodation ... we will fix this." He also said that he, the Minister, Deputy Coveney and the Department are confident they will have tackled that end of it by June. Which June are we talking about? Are we talking about getting people out of emergency accommodation?

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of time Deputy, and that I want to get on to answers and we did go over this earlier.

Photo of Ruth CoppingerRuth Coppinger (Dublin West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will finish on that point. Is it this year or next year? This year seems like an absolute impossibility but is that the plan?

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The answer earlier was that it would be this year.

Mr. John McCarthy:

I thank the Chairman and the Deputy. I wish to clarify that yes, the commitment in Rebuilding Ireland is to be using commercial hotels for emergency homeless accommodation only in exceptional circumstances by the middle of this year. That is the commitment. With regard to prioritising a number of different strands of activity are being deployed to be able to respond to priority areas and priority issues, particularly in homelessness. For example, that is why there is a HAP scheme for people who are homeless operating in Dublin with greater flexibilities. It is not operating anywhere else. The scheme significantly achieved its target last year. It applies across the four Dublin local authority areas. There is a significant programme of projects at various stages across the Dublin local authorities, including at construction stage. The rapid build programme will continue to add to that. The question of why local authorities decide to bring forward some sites and not others, we would say to the local authority that it is for the local authority to decide and prioritise itself. They are the local authorities for their own areas. We ask the local authority to come forward with proposals. On many occasions I get to hear public representatives - quite legitimately - challenging the Department for being too prescriptive and providing one-size solutions across the State. There is a balance to be struck and in doing so we rely on local authorities as the housing authority for their area to decide where within their area they should prioritise. Quite legitimately I would have no answer if councillors in a local authority were to ask the Department why the Department had chosen an area or that the local authority should prioritise one area over another. It is for the local authority to decide which of its projects it wants to bring forward, and in what sequence, as part of its overall strategy for responding to housing need in its area. This will be in the update when it is published.

There is a range of projects across the four Dublin local authorities. To clarify for Deputy Ó Broin, I can assure him that whatever frustration he senses my colleague might be facing in this regard, it is shared - with 50% more - on my part because like the Deputy, I am interested in where the problem is for the purposes of resolving it. There is no point in different people going around the place saying "It is stuck here and it is stuck there"; we need to be clear on how we can actually move and what it requires.

Deputy McGrath was offended by the language I used but I am talking about integrated engagement with the local authorities, one on one, so that we are in a position collectively, from their side and ours, to address the issues in a streamlined and efficient way.

Photo of Ruth CoppingerRuth Coppinger (Dublin West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How much for example would the Department give Fingal and the various councils? Everyone here is asking the same question, namely, why is there a gap between the councils and the money that the Department says is available. How much has the Department given them? We want to go back and tell them the Department says they have X million euro and ask why they are not developing those sites.

Mr. John McCarthy:

Targets were set in 2015 for the period 2015-17 for all local authorities. Now that the 2016 social housing needs assessment has been completed we had indicated we would revisit those targets for all local authorities prioritising where the needs were greatest as between the different local authorities. We have equally said to local authorities that if they have proposals which they felt they could not accommodate within the budgetary allocation provided to them they should come and talk to us. We have said this ever since the targets were first set in 2015 because things move at different paces. Things that we might expect to move at a particular pace in one local authority for one reason or another might not do so. The last thing we want is to be in a situation where collectively we are not using all the valuable resources that have been made available to us for meeting housing needs.

Last year, through that agile management of projects that were moving slowly and being able to move in with other delivery mechanisms, we spent our entire housing budget. We have a significant increase in that housing budget this year and aim again to spend wisely every single euro that is available to us. It will require ongoing agile management. I am not sure whether Deputy Coppinger was here earlier but in respect of recognising the priority and pressures in Dublin we engage on an incredibly regular basis with the four Dublin local authorities at chief executive and director of housing level in order to ensure we are doing everything we possibly can to be able to work with them to deliver on their housing programmes. That is the business we are in and will continue to be in.

Photo of Maria BaileyMaria Bailey (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCarthy. Our time is up but we will be meeting every week and hope to engage further with him on this. I thank Ms Bairbre Nic Aongusa, Ms Mary Hurley, Mr. David Walsh; Mr. Barry Quinlan and Mr. John McCarthy from the Department of Finance for their continuing engagement with, and commitment to keeping this committee updated. I look forward to meeting them again soon.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.03 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 1 February 2017.