Tenant in situ scheme prioritisation
Deputy Bacik criticised housing acquisition rules and said single renters at risk of homelessness were being overlooked. The Taoiseach defended prioritising the scheme to prevent homelessness and pointed to Housing First as part of the response.
Yesterday, the Department of housing announced it had allocated €265 million for housing acquisitions but it is unclear how much of that will support the tenant in situ scheme. We know from announcements that there are some restrictions on who can access the scheme. It seems priority is going to families, older people and disabled people. Single renters slip into homelessness at a higher rate than any other group and already the scheme is failing to address real need, even for those who apparently would have priority. It is increasingly difficult to prevent renters who receive an eviction notice from falling into homelessness because so many of us are finding gaps and flaws in the tenant in situ scheme, even where landlords want to help and even where individuals might be able to become a social tenant. Will the Taoiseach reassure us that Government will provide sufficient resourcing to meet the real needs of those who are at risk of homelessness, who are receiving notices and who are desperate to see the tenant in situ scheme activated and that single people as well as families and others will be able to access the scheme?
Comment on this
That is why there is prioritisation in the tenant in situ scheme that has been announced by the Minister for housing with approximately €325 million allocated, which is a substantial sum. There should be prioritisation because the original idea of this was to prevent people from falling into homelessness. Additional to that, of course, there is significant investment under way in the Housing First programme, which is one of the more effective ways, working with the approved housing bodies involved and with the various organisations for the homeless, to look after people who are homeless or on the brink of homelessness. It is important because we have had a debate in the House about value for money, looking at schemes, reviewing them and whether we are targeting properly. There has been huge debate about that. We should have that too in terms of a scheme and see whether we are actually directing the money to where it is needed most. That is the focus of this particular scheme and why priorities are being identified.