Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Nov 2023

I propose to take Questions Nos. 88 and 154 together.

In July 2022 we launched the vacant property refurbishment grant under the Croí Cónaithe towns fund. This supports bringing vacant and derelict properties back into use as homes. In May 2023 we announced a revised grant rate of up to a maximum of €50,000 available for the refurbishment of vacant properties for occupation as a principal private residence and for properties that may be available for rent, including the conversion of a property that had not previously been used as residential.

Where the refurbishment costs are expected to exceed the standard grant of up to €50,000 a further top-up grant to a maximum of €20,000 is available where the property is confirmed to be derelict or where the property is already on the local authority derelict sites register. This brings the total grant for a derelict property up to a maximum of €70,000. We have increased the amount of the grant by €20,000, from €30,000 to €50,000 and from €50,000 to €70,000 for derelict properties.

The grant is paid when works are completed following a final inspection by the local authority. Payment of the grant at the end of the process is to ensure the applicant has carried out the works applied for and approved, and to safeguard that the grant is related to the works that have been completed.

In order to support the timely delivery of properties back into use, from 1 May 2023 once a grant application receives approval the applicants must complete works applied for within a period of 13 months. On average, payment of grants issues 12 months from the date of approval, as works are completed. The time limit encourages the timely undertaking of the works applied for in order that grant approvals are not left extant indefinitely and the contingent liability is managed.

In exceptional circumstances, however, where an applicant experiences particular issues and cannot complete the works applied for under the grant within the 13-month period, the local authority may grant an extension of the approval period at its discretion.

We sent a reminder to them, with a departmental circular in October, that they had this level of discretion available to them.

Since the grant was launched in July 2022, just a little over a year ago, more than 5,000 applications have been made and 2,400 have been approved, which is nearly half. We regard this as a very successful scheme. When the Croí Cónaithe towns fund was launched, a commitment was given that the scheme funded by it would be kept under ongoing review. It is our intention that a comprehensive review and evaluation of the scheme in the context of the Croí Cónaithe towns fund will be undertaken by mid-2024. We will ensure that the question of how long grant approval should last will be considered in that too. However, it is important to be aware that the local authorities do have discretion to extend this time if they deem an applicant to be experiencing particular difficulties in completing the process within the given period.

I thank the Minister of State for outlining the circular issued to all local authorities. The Croí Cónaithe scheme has been invaluable. This has especially been the case in those areas where house prices are that bit lower than they might be elsewhere and additional works cannot be funded with borrowing because of the loan-to-value ratio and the cap the market places on homes in those areas. In areas, though, and I am thinking of parts of my constituency, this scheme enables people to go in and borrow money for their homes, and avail of this additional grant, which is not linked to the value of a property. This allows people to undertake this type of work. It enables work to be done that might otherwise have been only done by other people with higher incomes. This makes endeavours of this type more affordable to a broader range of people.

The problem is, and this is like anything we give to the local authorities, and I agree with things going to them, the local authorities do things differently in every local authority area. Dublin City Council is implementing the Croí Cónaithe scheme with far more rigidity than I would like it to. I would, therefore, welcome if the Minister of State could bring a little bit of standardisation to the 13-month period and an extension beyond that point.

Many people are considering this scheme positively, particularly since it was extended to people who live in rural areas. This is because those from rural areas who want to continue to live there are finding it very difficult to get planning permission. This scheme is an option if there is a derelict or vacant house in a locality, enabling people to bring such a building back into a liveable condition. However, the time scale from grant approval to having the grant-aided works completed is proving to be a problem in respect of being too short. This is especially the case when there is difficulty getting workers to do the work in the time allowed. This view is shared by those operating the scheme within the local authorities. They have requested an extension of the time allowed, but this has not been granted.

The Minister of State has said discretion is possible, but, again, as Deputy McAuliffe said, this will be operated differently in different local authorities. It needs to be standardised. One local authority could give discretion for one reason, but another might not grant it for the same reason. Do the local authorities have clear guidelines regarding which aspects they can exercise their discretion on or the conditions in which they can extend the time?

I thank the Deputies. Yes, we have given directions and guidelines to the local authorities. However, in the interests of absolute clarity, we will write to the local authorities again on this specific area of discretion. On a couple of points, if an application was approved prior to 1 May 2022, the Deputy will probably be aware that applicants have 18 months. We have now extended the scheme from 1 May to rental properties as well.

We want this scheme to be a very successful one. By way of providing information to the Deputies, Dublin City Council has received 240 applications to date, of which 44 have been approved. The average processing time overall is 81 days. I visited the offices of Dublin City Council on Tuesday specifically regarding this area. The Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, has also spoken to the council. We want to see it progress this scheme. It has put additional staff in the area. We very much wish to see a refocusing on dereliction and the Croí Cónaithe scheme itself. It is, therefore, opportune that the Deputies have raised this question now, in that we have met and spoken with representatives of the council concerning this matter.

In terms of Cavan-Monaghan, a situation which will be of interest to Deputy Tully, there were 183 applications in County Cavan, of which 112 have been approved. The processing time is posting at 59 days, which is well below the average. Turning to County Monaghan, there were 111 applications, of which 59 have been processed. The processing time there is 56 days, which is doing very well in this context. I reassure the Deputies, though, that we will write to the local authorities - I will ask officials to do it - in terms of re-emphasising that discretion in this regard is available. We will look at this matter in terms of the overall context of the review.

We want this scheme to be an unqualified success. To date, there has been great interest. This has been the case in urban areas, and the point was well made concerning loan-to-value ratios in this regard. The scheme has been equally successful in rural areas. This is a very straightforward scheme. We want people to go back into homes that have been vacant for more than two years, those built prior to 2008, and we are very pleased with the success of this scheme to date.

I thank the Minister of State. I especially welcome the update concerning Dublin City Council and the interaction in this regard. We have been speaking with the Minister for some time. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan, who asked me to raise this parliamentary question on his behalf today, has also been working with Cork County Council, and perhaps the same interaction could be undertaken with that local authority.

This is an important scheme and it is having an impact. I always have a wry smile when Sinn Féin backbenchers are looking for better implementation of a scheme opposed by their frontbench, but we will let them off with that.

-----clarify again that we never opposed this scheme; we would just do it much better.

The scheme also requires that the work to be done must be paid for upfront, with the grant moneys being claimed back afterwards. Again, the cost of materials and of work is rising and doing so very quickly. This is also causing problems for some people as well. It has been brought to my attention that it would be beneficial if consideration were to be given to paying the grant in phases. I do not know if this is an option but it is something that even an organisation like Macra na Feirme raised in its pre-budget submission. In the context of the grant, it was seeking an extension of the time allowed for the work to be completed from 13 months to two years, and for the work to be paid for on a phased basis, if at all possible. As I said, we want to facilitate more young people interested in farming. They want to live on or close to their farms. This scheme is an option when they cannot get planning permission. We need more young people to go into farming, so we should explore anything we can do to support them.

I raised this point during the week, but I wish to do so again to see if I can get a commitment from the Minister. It concerns the vacancy requirement for this scheme. It is set at two years currently. Recently, my colleagues on Clare County Council passed a resolution in an effort to seek a reduction in this time from two years to six months. I support the councillors in this request.

I also understand that a review is to begin in the middle of next year. I would be grateful if consideration could be given to bringing this process forward to Christmas of this year.

I know it is working in Carlow. I have been working with many families in this regard. Do the Deputies know where I feel the benefits of this scheme are being experienced? It is within the town centre. There are homes there that we are now bringing back into use and with them, increased footfall in the town. I refer to the great number of people who have come to me in the town centre of Carlow looking to avail of this grant. I am delighted we are extending it. Well done to the Minister and credit where credit is due. This is a really good scheme.

I think that Deputy Ó Broin, in his interpretation of Croí Cónaithe, is trying to do a twist of faith. He is basically changing the scheme.

Our scheme works.

Maybe he has seen the light. In the interests of clarity, Deputy Tully asked about people being able to build in rural areas. I very much support that. We increased the grant from €30,000 to €50,000 and from €50,000 to €70,000 in terms of the costs involved. We extended it to rental properties. We brought the period of time back two years from pre-1993. We have made significant changes to the scheme. We will do a review of the scheme, as we are doing. We have overcome the issue of the second charge. The scheme is there. It is very much a fit-for-purpose scheme.

The point Deputy Wynne made will form part of the review. There were 248 applications in Clare and 119 of those have been approved. Regarding Carlow-Kilkenny, in Carlow there have been 59 applications and 20 approved and in Kilkenny, there were 110 applications and 43 approved. My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, has brought through a very creative sister scheme with €7,500 available for farmhouses in rural areas in terms of bringing consultants in. In tandem, we want to preserve the old farmhouses but allow people to live in them. What the Minister of State has brought forward will ensure that area is assisted. Deputy McAuliffe made reference to urban areas as well. Overall, this scheme works because of its simplicity. Anyone can apply. We certainly want to see the processing times improving in certain local authorities but overall to date, this scheme is working.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 91, 99 and 124 together. Last year, we exceeded our housing delivery targets and we will exceed them again this year. We will deliver more new social homes this year than we did last year and will continue to break records with the largest social housing provision in 50 years. We will build substantially more affordable homes than last year and we have more first-time buyers, as the Deputy knows, buying homes than since 2007 with the support of this Government through things like the help to buy grant and the first home scheme. Sinn Féin has not yet changed its mind on that, apparently. It is still opposed to that.

To answer Deputy Murnane O'Connor's question, to the end of September of this year, 289 new homes commenced in Carlow. This is an increase of 26% on the same period in 2022 and the highest number of commencements in Carlow for this period since the data series began in 2014. With three months of the year still remaining, commencements so far this year already exceed the second highest number for Carlow since 2014. This will be a record-breaking year for the Deputy's county of Carlow. Similar progress is being made in Longford and Westmeath. Other Deputies are tied to this question but they are not present.

I have had the pleasure of visiting Carlow with the Deputy. There is a very strong social housing pipeline and the Croí Cónaithe scheme is working very well. Those schemes are not counted in those commencement figures. We should and will look at capturing those because they are new homes and affordable homes coming back in and there is a €50,000 or €70,000 grant there as well. Things like the development levy waiver, which the Members opposite in Sinn Féin opposed, and waiving the Uisce Éireann connection charge have had a real effect in boosting commencements in the middle of this year. It is saving homeowners money, putting money back into their pockets and making it more affordable for them.

When we came into government and Deputy O'Brien became Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, there were huge challenges. As a Senator and now as a Deputy, I have seen the changes happening in Carlow. As the Minister said, this has been a game changer since 2014. We are now building houses. In January, we will have 20 affordable houses in Carlow through our local authority, which we never had before. I see the difference it is making. I see the difference in the mortgages, with people coming into my office applying and getting mortgages they could not get before. It is important that we highlight the good work that is happening in our own areas. I want to welcome this. The Minister knows I am always looking for more houses. There is no question about that.

In Carlow, we have made those strides. I also compliment Carlow County Council on the work it has been doing. We could do with more staff. That is another thing. We have all gotten together. Everybody is working together, including all the councillors and the new chief executive Coilín O'Reilly. Everybody is working together to get as many houses as we can.

I know this is a little bit different but it is something we need to look at. I thank the Minister. He gave us a prevention officer two weeks ago but I am looking for a homelessness officer now. I will come back to him on that.

There is no question that progress is being made right across the country in every local authority area, in all 26 counties of the Republic. We are acutely aware that we need to do a lot more but there has been a step change in housing delivery under this Government. About 40% to 50% of the homes that will be delivered this year will be backed by this Government, be they social or affordable homes or assisted through the help to buy grant. The State is leading by example here. Looking at the numbers, 31,500 homes have been completed in the year to September and the third quarter of this year is the third quarter in a row where rolling 12-month completions have surpassed 30,000. That is significant progress. People know what the issues were, particularly through Covid. Others want to forget that we had two construction shutdowns. For public safety reasons we had to close sites. Most sites were closed. We are catching up on that now.

I have had the pleasure of visiting the local authority in Carlow a number of times with the Deputy. Colleagues there are doing a really good job. Another thing we have done is provide the land acquisition fund-----

-----for local authorities like the one in Carlow. Now we are purchasing the land for them, and for approved housing bodies as well, to build into the future so we have the land banks to continue to deliver the homes we need. The progress is very welcome. We are not at all going to rest on our laurels. We want to do more. The pipeline for next year, looking at the commencements for this year, is very strong too. Next year we will have another record year in delivery of homes for our people.

I am aware that there are more houses in the pipeline for next year, working with Carlow County Council. One of the areas I addressed with the Minister recently when I brought him to Carlow is the modular builds we have, which are new modern homes. This is important because we need to build as many homes as possible. That is happening. We need to build homes quicker. I know the Minister is very much aware of this and very much on board with building houses as quick as we can. It is important that we continue our good progress in Carlow and that we continue the building we are doing for the next few years because we want to get everyone off the housing list.

The only thing I need to ask the Minister for now is a permanent homelessness officer in Carlow because we are seeing homeless people coming in. In fairness, we are working with Carlow County Council on that but we need a permanent one. I am asking the Minister for a commitment on that. All the council staff in Carlow are doing their best. I know they are understaffed and I am looking for more staff.

On staffing and resources, local authorities have never had more staff than they have now. They have never had more resources than they have now. Where we receive submissions from local authorities, like in this instance from Carlow County Council, if they put a case forward to us and require additional sanction, we look at those requests favourably, though they obviously have to stack up. Following the Deputy's intervention today, I will await the receipt of that submission from Carlow County Council and we will look at it and deal with it as efficiently and expeditiously as possible.

The Deputy mentioned the area of homelessness in her response, and rightly so. While we are building more homes, and we are, delivering more social homes and have seen significant reductions in social housing waiting lists, there are still people out there who do not have a home at all.

They are, and will remain, the Government's number one priority. More people exited homelessness into permanent social homes than ever before in the past three quarters. That is welcome but we will never take our eye off the ball on that. That is why the increased supply is important. It is starting to make a real difference. We have to continue to work on that with local authorities, such as Carlow County Council.

On modern methods of construction, MMC, I had the pleasure of visiting the plant in Carlow with the Deputy. It is impressive to see life being breathed back into the old Braun factory in the centre of the town with hundreds of jobs created and high quality off-site homes being produced through MMC. We are doing more and more of that throughout the country. We have targeted local authorities and 1,500 homes are to be delivered through MMC on sites where we have removed the debt from local authorities. We are encouraging them. It makes sense from a climate perspective, an efficiency perspective and a time perspective. The new factory in Carlow is incredibly impressive and I see MMC as a main way of increasing efficient supply.

I raise the glamorous subject of septic tanks or domestic private wastewater treatment plants, as they are properly known. My Green Party colleague, Deputy Ó Cathasaigh recently raised some important questions at the Committee of Public Accounts about rates of inspection of septic tanks. Will the Minister of State outline the number of septic tanks there are nationally, the number of inspections of septic tanks that are carried out, the take-up of grant aid for treatment systems in the high status objective catchment areas and in prioritised areas for action schemes? We need to raise public awareness of the available grants and the health implications of a poorly performing system.

I thank the Deputy for asking this question on behalf of Deputy Ó Cathasaigh who has raised this issue consistently at every opportunity. On 3 November 2023, the Minister announced changes to the three grants for domestic wastewater treatment systems, commonly known as septic tanks. The changes include increasing the grant amount available from €5,000 to a maximum of €12,000, a 140% increase, and removing the registration requirement. That is welcome. These improvements will help householders to reduce the impact on human health and the environmental risk from defective treatment systems. The changes come into effect from 1 January next year.

The Central Statistics Office, CSO - not my Department - collects information on the types of wastewater treatment systems that serve households. Census 2016 recorded that there were nearly 500,000 domestic wastewater treatment systems in Ireland. More details can be accessed on the CSO website. My understanding is that there are approximately 438,000 individual septic tanks and 50,000 other individual treatment systems.

The high status objective catchment areas and prioritised areas for action grant schemes were introduced in June 2020. The uptake of these two schemes has been low with most grants to date being paid under the national inspection plan. The idea of a public awareness campaign is useful. The increased grants scheme the Minister announced last week will give the opportunity to progressively improve the situation. It is important to note that the three grants are demand led.

The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, publishes a national inspection plan on domestic wastewater treatment systems, which provides for an increase in the number of inspections to 1,200 per annum from 1,000 previously, a 20% increase, starting this year. The change will also lead to an increase in grant uptake. The current plan for 2022 to 2026 can be found on the EPA website.

The information requested in tabular form is detailed. I will, therefore, arrange for this information and the relevant website links to be sent to the Deputy separately.

I thank the Minister of State. I completely agree with him that we need to raise public awareness of this and of the substantial grant increase that has been introduced by the Minister. I did some research and worked out that there are probably approximately 500,000 private domestic wastewater treatment systems in operation. However, a report published by the EPA in June suggests that only 1,147 have been inspected. That is a low inspection rate given the high number of people who use wastewater treatment plants and when we consider that the urban wastewater directive sets out the standards for urban wastewater treatment systems. A total of 500,000 domestic systems do not have a high standard of testing. That has implications for groundwater, especially when considering climate change and the increase in the water table, which will also affect the operation of domestic wastewater systems. The public awareness campaign the Minister of State mentioned is of critical importance to highlight that we have increased the grant for people to take remedial action where necessary.

Again, I wholeheartedly agree about a public awareness campaign. Perhaps a lack of public awareness has led to the previous low uptake. A circular will be sent by the Department next week and a question and answer section on the schemes will be available on the Department's website. The Deputy is correct. We will lead off on a new cycle of the river basin management plan early next year, which will be ambitious. It is important that it is. We know from the most recent EPA report that we have a significant problem as regards water quality. As I said, I will furnish the information in tabular form to the Deputy in which it can be seen that the uptake of the grants is inconsistent across the country. There seems to be a high uptake in the north west but the problems are universal, depending on ground types. It has a significant impact on water quality and, as the Deputy said, climate change is impacting negatively on this as well.

I am aware that in rural areas there is no choice but to have a septic tank and it is important that we assist people as much as possible to fix those tanks. However, another situation has arisen that I have raised with the Department and the Minister previously. We have urban areas that were once rural. A town has grown and enveloped what was once a rural area. We have houses in my town, Bray, and I am sure in many towns in the constituencies of other Deputies, which are still on septic tanks, although there is a mains network nearby. It is expensive for householders to pay for the infrastructure to be brought to the house. They do not have any problem with paying the connection fee, like everyone else, but the infrastructure can be quite large. I hope the Minister of State will take the matter back to consider whether there is a scheme under which we could help people whose houses that were once rural - they were out in the countryside but the town has grown - to connect to the mains system which may now be close to their homes.

The Deputy made a valid point about urban areas that have grown into rural areas where there are one-off houses that now need to be connected. It is a priority for Uisce Éireann. The Minister will announce a new scheme next week for villages to upgrade systems. That is vital. We often hear from Deputies in the House about areas, particularly rural areas, where there are challenges around wastewater treatment. It is a priority for the Government in respect of funding Uisce Éireann and the work it has to carry out.

Separately, it is important to look at innovation around integrated construction, wetlands and other innovations that could be used in clustered housing in rural areas that might address issues in water quality. The Government is determined to look at it and to try to address. It is critical to try to address these issues when the grant schemes are brought forward. It is important that householders avail of the grants and the public awareness campaign will be important. The uptake of the grant is important. This matter is affecting human health, water quality and the receiving environment.

Will the Minister give consideration to those in a domestic abuse situation who often through a housing assistant payment, HAP, or other form of temporary housing find refuge away from the family home and were previously on a local authority waiting list in their area? Could they be allowed to transfer to a local authority waiting list in another area without losing the time they have built up? These are unique circumstances that give some room for consideration of the matter.

It is an important question. Before I answer it, for clarity, in a cursory glance at Croí Cónaithe, it is important that Members state their correct position.

In its alternative budget last year, Sinn Féin stated, "As part of the financing of this component of our public housing policy Sinn Féin would redirect the small amount of funding in the Croí Cónaithe Towns fund into the capital funding for Local Authorities."

In respect of this important matter, applications for social housing support, as Deputy McAuliffe knows, are set by each local authority, and that is governed by the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009. Generally, it is not possible for a household previously on one social housing waiting list to carry over the time spent on the list when applying to another local authority. A new and separate application form would be required and assessed against the eligibility, including income limits and the criteria of which the Deputy will be aware. If deemed eligible, the applicant household will qualify for a suite of supports, including HAP, as he mentioned. Local authorities will prioritise allocations to those households they consider to be most in need and that can include survivors of domestic violence. Notwithstanding this, the programme for Government provides for a package of social housing reforms.

I will continue my contribution in my supplementary reply, but this is an area we are actively looking at and we should look at it in the context of discretion in each local authority area, not least for survivors of domestic, gender-based and sexual violence. The social housing passport is being looked at as well, although there are complexities as to how that will be administered. Many survivors need to leave where they are for their own safety and all of us, I am sure, have dealt with cases such as this. I am glad the Deputy raised the issue. We can point to the area of discretion in each local authority area in the context of priorities.

I welcome the Minister being open to the issue. I dealt recently with case where a HAP tenant who had been a victim of domestic violence was losing her home and the local authority included them in the tenant in situ scheme. It was a bit convoluted getting there but she walked away from a property interest she had in a family home. Anybody else would ask why someone would walk away from a property interest but it was because she was so damaged by the experience and so broken by what had happened that she just could not go back to that home. She could not in any way go back to that relationship. She did not want to give that person control over her life.

In those very limited circumstances, we should provide discretion at the local authority level. I had not considered that, but I would have great confidence in local authority staff that they would do that. I agree we have to be careful and, representing a Dublin constituency, I do not want everybody in the country to be able to switch to Dublin such that people who have been on the list for many years will be pushed down the list. Nevertheless, I ask that, in these very limited circumstances, something be done to address the issue.

There are areas, as the Deputy knows, where local authorities can provide priority, and the scheduling of allocations is governed by them. I have seen cases where a survivor of domestic violence has needed to leave their home and the local authority has been very supportive, even in instances where somebody has an interest in a family home but has to leave it.

We are making progress on this. We have changed how we fund domestic violence refuges. The capital assistance scheme, which provided 100% of the funding for accommodation, will also advance 100% of funding for ancillary services related to residences and counselling rooms. Our Department is doing a lot of work to support the Department of Justice and State agencies, with a particular focus on areas of the country where there are no refuges and to prioritise those areas. I was recently in Wexford, where a new refuge is being built. Following the Deputy's intervention, we will discuss this further with local authorities and revert to him.

Many years ago, when local authorities had a smaller number of approved housing bodies providing housing and they had more discretion to take it outside the scheme of lettings, those AHB developments were often used for these more sensitive cases where discretion could be applied, although we are in a changed landscape compared with where we were ten years ago, when local authorities had that power. As for the discretion of housing officers, they have a greater understanding of the housing crisis than perhaps even anybody in this House and, therefore, they are also able to understand the uniqueness of such a case where there is domestic violence. Perhaps, within parameters and with necessary controls in place, something could be put in at a local authority level. Applicants could spend eight, nine or ten years on a waiting list and could be subjected to domestic violence in a relationship that had developed midway through that process. For them to lose all that time and then to find themselves starting all over again in a new area is hard enough but they should not be disadvantaged further in securing housing when they could build a new life for themselves with a home. Anything we can do will be welcome.

I thank Deputy McAuliffe for raising this very important matter many of us have raised for a number of years. The social housing passport is the solution to this issue. It has been promised for a decade. The then Minister, Deputy Kelly, had it in his Social Housing 2020 plan published in 2014, and his successor, Deputy Coveney, had it in his Rebuilding Ireland 2016. It is in the current Government's housing plan. I do not accept it is complicated. The Government has to decide what criteria should apply. Domestic violence is clearly one but there are a number of others, such as employment, education and medical needs. If the Minister were to bring forward such legislation, he would have the universal support of the House. The social housing passport is the answer. It has been a decade in the making. We will support the Minister if he introduces it, and we urge him to do that as soon as he can.

I thank Deputy McAuliffe for raising this very important issue. On that, will the Minister give us an update on the social housing passport? I am concerned discretion will just not be enough to get what we are looking for here.

Separately, it can be especially frustrating for people who have suffered domestic violence to have delays in HAP applications. I know that is an issue across the board but particularly for people who have suffered domestic violence, that needs to be given priority. Will the Minister comment on that?

I thank all the Deputies for their contributions. The two Ministers of State and I discussed this yesterday at length on foot of Deputy McAuliffe's question, and I have engaged also with the Minister for Justice in respect of the new national strategy and what we can do to help in that regard. Moreover, the Minister for Social Protection has made changes on the social welfare side.

To respond to Deputy O'Callaghan, the HAP issue is certainly something we can reiterate. What I find, having dealt with individual cases, is that there is a case officer and cases are usually processed quickly when it is understood what the situation is where someone needs to access another property.

Turning to Deputy Ó Broin, we have carried out the scoping exercise on the social housing passport and it is a commitment in the programme for Government. There are genuine administrative issues, given it would involve tracking the movement of people across the board, so it is understood it is not easy. Nevertheless, in regard to this extremely vulnerable cohort, it is something that, following our meeting yesterday, we are going to look at again to see whether we can do this without having other consequences or setting a precedent across the board. We will look at it and I thank Deputy McAuliffe for his question.

I answered this question earlier in response to Deputy Ó Broin but am happy to do so again. We will have another webinar for residents next Monday, which will be attended by representatives of the Housing Agency. Between 400 and 600 people have attended various webinars and we are directly engaging with residents in this regard. I want the interim scheme relating to fire defects to open for applications this month, if at all possible. I assure residents that the Government and the three parties that constitute it are fully committed to the scheme. We will need legislation next year - there is no question about that - but, in the meantime, we will open the applications for the interim measures to promote safety. We have done quite a lot of detailed work with the Housing Agency on specific apartment schemes as well. It was important to get the code of practice agreed because we need to know when people are applying what types of work can be done and what is in scope.

We needed the input of the chief fire officer, those experts and fire engineers as well. That took a lot of time - rightly so. We have now published that so there is clarity on what needs to be done and the process. We have also opened the information portal. A number of developments and individuals can now input their details into that. We are capturing a lot of that data. We will go through that specifically in the webinar on Monday evening. We are close to opening the interim scheme for applications.

As I mentioned to other Deputies earlier, on an administrative basis, for those who paid for works already, are certified and will meet criteria, we will early next year start reimbursing them and making retrospective payments. Where people and the management company are in a position to go ahead with works, they should, if they have the finance to do it. They will get that money back on a 100% basis. I hope that gives the Deputy an update. I thank him for his particular interest and engagement on this issue.

The code of practice and portal are welcome but they have been open for a while. I am representing the frustration of the Not Our Fault campaign and other constituents who are regularly outside protesting and looking for this. I appreciate what the Minister is saying around owners' management companies, OMCs, but the reality is there is tension between residents and many owners' management companies. The OMCs do not have the money and look to get it for the works from residents who do not have the money. There is a variety OMCs. There is a deep tension at times. There are issues with insurance and huge risk. The code of practice and portal are welcome but I have to give voice to that frustration that it is taking its time and has been slow. I welcome that it will open this month; I hope it does.

I was party to the negotiations on the programme for Government. There are apartments and schemes in my area and I have friends, family and constituents affected by this. I engaged directly with people right the way through. The legislation is important; that will be next year. This scheme will be with us for a number of years. It needs to be underpinned by primary legislation. I get that people want this done now but we have to make sure the interim and permanent schemes do what people want them to do. The commitment the Government has given to reimburse 100% of costs is crucially important. While I get that people have been frustrated with some delays this year, we have moved a long way forward. There is not just hope for people; there is certainty that we are stepping in based on a market failure, supporting residents and homeowners and moving forward with this. We intend to have the interim scheme for applications open this month.

The Social Housing Assessment Regulations 2011 prescribe maximum net income limits for each local authority in different bands according to the area concerned, with income defined and assessed according to a standard household means policy. The baseline income eligibility thresholds were increased for all local authorities, with effect from 1 January 2023, by €5,000 to €40,000, €35,000 and €30,000 for bands 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The household means policy provides for a range of income disregards and local authorities have discretion to disregard income that is temporary, short-term or once-off in nature. All income from social assistance payments, allowances and benefits, including working family payment, is assessable. The payments included in the policy were reviewed in 2021. As it was found that the majority of working family payment recipients are in receipt of the payment for more than one year, it was recommended that the working family payment should not be considered short term in nature and, therefore, should remain as assessable income. While there are no plans to amend the policy at this time, all matters concerning social housing policy are constantly under review as part of our Department’s work on the broader social housing reform agenda. In that context, the Department continues to work on developing options for a potential revised or new social housing income eligibility model. It is expected that proposals will be submitted for consideration by the Minister when the analysis is completed.

I am raising this issue because a single parent, a woman with three children, came into my office. She is facing eviction. She works two days a week and receives the lone parent payment and working family payment and is now over the threshold for social housing in her area. When discussing this case with the housing officer in the local authority, she commented that the working family payment puts a lot of people over the threshold. It is a weekly, tax-free payment for employees with children. It supports people on low pay; it is not counted as means for the medical card application. Can it not be considered as means for the social housing list? It disproportionately affects single parents in this instance. This woman is considering not claiming the payment so that she can get back under the threshold to be considered for the social housing list.

There are probably cases like that all over the country. Prior to 2011, there were no income limits and there was inconsistency across local authorities. Some disregarded while some included all incomes. That is why the household means policy was introduced. It sets out the manner by which local authorities should assess the means of an applicant for social housing support for the purpose of determining the household's ability to provide accommodation from its own resources. The policy also provides for a range of income disregards and local authorities have discretion to disregard income that is temporary, short term or once-off in nature. The vast majority of recipients of the working family payment were receiving it for more than one year, so it was considered not to be short term in nature. The Minister is in the process of reviewing the income eligibility model. It can be examined. It is unfortunate in the case of the applicant the Deputy mentioned. The local authority discretion is there. I hope that the family she mentioned is in a position to find suitable accommodation.

A number of years ago, this would not have mattered so much because if someone did not qualify for social housing, private rentals were available and affordable. They are neither available or affordable at the moment for people just over the threshold for social housing. In fact, they are not affordable for people on a medium or even a high income at this stage. I know of many individuals and families who have turned down work, stayed working part time instead of full time, refused overtime and are not claiming payments to which they are entitled because it would push them over the threshold to stay on the social housing list, so they can stay in receipt of HAP. That should not happen. Can more discretion be offered to local authorities on payments such as this for families facing eviction to keep them on the social housing list?

To refer back to the local authority's responsibility and role in supporting that family, the Deputy's local authority was under band 3. The income eligibility was increased to €30,000. The increase in the three bands was welcome and had been sought for some time. We supported it in government. On the particular case the Deputy referenced, it is unfortunate that the applicant had to opt for that approach but, as I said, the Minister is in the process of reassessing the social housing income eligibility model based on other elements of income assessment payments. I cannot offer any solution for the applicant about which she spoke.

The number of children growing up without a home has never been so high in the history of this State. There are record numbers of children growing up homeless. This is having a devastating impact on their development and well-being. What is the Minister doing to reduce the number of children becoming homeless? I ask the senior Minister to answer.

Supporting individuals and families facing homelessness is a key Government priority. We are supporting households to exit homelessness by increasing the supply of housing. The Department has prioritised measures that focus on accelerating social and affordable housing supply through a combination of new builds, targeted acquisitions and leasing. A record €4.5 billion was available this year to support the largest State investment ever, including 9,100 direct-build social homes and 5,000 affordable homes.

We have the tenant in situ scheme. We have also established the national homeless action committee, NHAC, the overarching objective of which is to ensure that a renewed emphasis is brought to collaboration across government to implement actions in Housing for All, along with bringing better and coherent co-ordination of homeless-related services in delivering policy measures in order to address homelessness, including for children. Homelessness prevention is an immediate priority of the NHAC. A subgroup of the NHAC was established-----