The Central Statistics Office, CSO, estimates that approximately 30,000 homes were completed last year. However, independent analysis of the number of homes completed and certified by the National Building Control and Market Surveillance Office shows that less than 24,000 homes were built. Is the Taoiseach aware that, according to the methodology used by the CSO, its calculations on the number of new homes built may only have an 83% level of accuracy? Furthermore, in terms of the crosschecking carried out on its data, the CSO states it has a considerably higher number - 22% more - of false positives compared with false negatives? The CSO states its methodology may have a "bias towards overcounting new dwellings". Given the considerable caveats in the methodology, is there merit in using the hard data from the National Building Control and Market Surveillance Office to count the number of homes completed last year?

I recall having this debate on how we count the numbers during the previous Government when Eoghan Murphy was the Minister with responsibility for housing. At that point, the CSO updated its methodology. The methodology the office uses, which is published on its website, was welcomed across the board at the time, including by Deputy Ó Broin, for example, and others. I am a little bit disappointed, now that the figures are showing we are exceeding our targets, some people want to change the way we count them again. The methodology was welcomed by the Opposition at the time, particularly by Deputy Ó Broin. The CSO has issued a statement on this. I understand it states that the private firm, Construction Information Services, to which the Deputy referred, is reporting 6,000 fewer new builds than the CSO official data. Essentially, what the CSO is saying is that the system the private company is using is subject to under-coverage as it does not capture all new dwellings, particularly one-off dwellings, of which there are 6,000 to 8,000 every year. The CSO is an independent body. It is not subject to political influence and it does not spin the numbers. I think we should respect its work.