Mr. Eddie Punch:

The ICSA welcomes this opportunity to discuss this issue. It is linked to the recent announcement of new terms and conditions, and grant ceiling under the vacant property refurbishment grant, the Croí Cónaithe fund. In principle, ICSA strongly recommends and welcomes the changes that came into place this month. There is a housing crisis, which has been the subject of much discussion. The background to this is a huge increase in population. In 2022, we had a population of 5.1 million, an increase of 1.2 million on 2002 and a 7.6% increase since 2016. The census also showed that the increase in housing stock since 2016 is 6% and, therefore, housing is not keeping pace with population growth. We have had some difficulties in providing enough housing over recent years. The financial crisis, the Covid-19 lockdown, the return of skilled builders to other EU countries and further afield all have posed challenges and there is also, of course, the escalating cost of materials. Nonetheless, there has been some improvement in housing delivery with 29,851 new homes completed in 2022. This is well below the boom years when 93,000 houses were completed in 2006, and while we do not necessarily want to return to the excess of those years, we need to build more houses than we are currently. There has also been a substantial influx of refugees and other immigrants in the past year or so, partially because of the horrendous Ukrainian war. All of this creates demand for housing and we need to be innovative in the way we try to do this.

For all of those reasons, it is good to consider how we can achieve this. What part can rural Ireland play? It is true that the housing crisis is most acute in the large urban centres. Let us consider some facts. According to last year's census, there is a housing stock of 2.1 million but 166,000 vacant homes. Of the latter figure, farm houses were estimated to comprise approximately 12,000 units. There is some potential to provide additional housing in rural areas and on farms. There is a question about how these figures were arrived at. They were achieved by census enumerators but there are probably a lot more derelict properties on farm units, in particular, that the enumerators would not have even come across. It is the case that not all of the 166,000 houses may have been vacant on the night of the census but maybe a more meaningful indicator is that there was approximately 48,000 houses vacant in 2016 that were also vacant in 2022. The number of houses that are vacant on farmland is significant but the question is whether they are in the right location. Certainly, Dublin and the large cities are where the need is greatest. On the other hand, according to the census, the biggest increase in population in 2022 was actually in County Longford at 14%. It might help their football team in the future. That was followed by County Meath, and again the same point, at 13%. County Leitrim's population increased by 10% but its housing stock only increased by 3%. Clearly, there is need for more housing in rural areas as well. Although lots of migrants want to live in the cities, we see lots of immigrants in rural areas.

There are Brazilians living in rural areas, for example. There is demand in rural areas and farmers with derelict farmland properties can be part of the solution.

Aside from that, the reality is that there are people who grew up in rural areas who want to live in the communities in which they grew up. That is evident from planning applications. We need to accommodate it as much as possible.

The new derelict property grant is welcome but there are many issues. The grant rate is reasonably large but the cost of renovating these properties is likely to substantially exceed the grant, particularly in the case of derelict properties. It could cost upwards of €150,000. The documents indicate that the maximum grant may be payable for three-bedroom properties but there is a lack of clarity in respect of two-bedroom properties. A condition of the scheme is that the properties can be owner-occupied or available for rent. That is positive and we welcome it but there is a lot of bureaucracy around this. The scheme states that the property must be occupied by the owner or rented out for ten years after the achievement of grant. It is understandable for that condition to be included but we need flexibility to deal with circumstances that may arise because the penalty for not achieving the terms and conditions is stark. For the first five years, the penalty is a 100% clawback of the grant, while for the next five years it is 75%. Some people may be deterred by the fact that a legal charge is put in place over the property.

That legal charge is relevant to the next problem, which is the issue of financing these renovations. It is next to impossible to achieve bank finance over an appropriate timeframe, that is, one of 15 years or more, for the renovation of a derelict property on farmland or anywhere else. We need the Government to engage with financial institutions to ensure lack of finance is not a problem. In reality, most people will not have this cash available. Tax takes in excess of 50% from small-scale landlords are likely to be a big barrier. There is a need to consider tax incentives in parallel with the grant aid.

In general, we need local authorities to take a pragmatic approach to ensuring there are minimum blockages to people building or renovating these properties. A small number of them may be listed properties but many of them may be traditional buildings with character. Some of them may have been repurposed for farming needs and we need to ensure there is a pragmatic approach to getting these houses into use. There is an issue relating to insurance in the case of people moving to live on a farm. It is an old issue but it may be a barrier. General rules relating to landlord-tenant arrangements are starting to come down strongly in favour of the tenant and that may be overkill in the context of incentivising people to do this. We need to ensure that people who move to the countryside understand there are aromas from silage and sounds from milking machines and that there are no objections to those kinds of things. That needs to be considered.

In general, we welcome the scheme. There are plenty of properties that can be repurposed on farmland. We need to make sure we minimise the bureaucracy and get rid of the unrealistic timeframe for completion. A period of 13 months is not realistic, given that problems will arise in renovation and there is reliance on a scarce building sector to do the work. I thank the Chairman.