Written answers
Tuesday, 27 May 2025
Department of Housing, Planning, and Local Government
Community Welfare Services
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
399. To ask the Minister for Housing, Planning, and Local Government if his Department spent €1.6 million or recouped €1.6 million in relation to the community car initiative (CCI) (details supplied); if all 23 local development companies accepted the full allocation of €118,500 made available to each; his views on the funding arrangements and financial oversight of the CCI; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27576/25]
James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My Department made funding available to the participating Local Development Companies (LDC) for the operation of the Community Car Initiative (CCI). The total expenditure by my Department under the CCI scheme was €1.6m across the 23 LDCs that participated in the scheme.
Not all LDCs required the allocation of €118,500. Some LDCs received lesser amounts, and this variation in funding is attributable to differences such as; the geographical location and size of the LDC, the spread of properties participating in the Offer a Home scheme within that area; a shorter period of participation by the LDC in the initiative; and, the level of need for the CCI in particular areas.
The LDCs participating in the CCI scheme applied to the relevant local authority for funding on a vouched basis, which is considered good practice. These local authorities then sought funding from my Department in order to recoup these costs. The payment of funding from my Department to the local authorities was based on evidence of actual expenditure, with supporting documentation.
The operation of the CCI scheme supported the Offer a Home scheme. It supported the participation of vacant, rural properties and holiday homes for the provision of much needed accommodation for beneficiaries of temporary protection. Without the CCI scheme, these vacant properties would have remained under utilised or entirely rejected from the scheme.
No comments