Brian Stanley Demands Answers on First-Home Scheme and AHBs

And welcome to the guests, the Witnesses Committee. Could I just start, Miss Behan, just in relation to the affordable housing delivery, and a very, very important subject. Could I ask you that? You mentioned in your presentation that there was 14,500 affordable housing supports in the last five years. Now, just can we keep the questions and answers short, because we're a short time, and I don't want to be brooked or with you. So I'll just ask you, how many of those, roughly, what percentage of those were first-home scheme grants? Of the 14,500, 6,500. So nearly half the matter. And that's the extra support by way of the extra equity, the equity delivered by increased borrowing by a bank or by the state. So the first-home scheme operates to bridge the gap between what the purchaser can afford to pay and the market value of the home. It's more debt on the house buyer. It is an equity stake that is held by the first-home scheme, which may be bought out over time. Thank you. And has the department done any analysis in relation to what effect that may be having on house prices after the introduction of that scheme? Because there's evidence from England that shows that when the similar scheme was brought in, the house prices did increase significantly. Anecdotally, looking around, you know, when that scheme came in, it would look, you know, pretty much, if you're looking in auctioneers' windows, particularly in new developments, that house prices did go up. So yes or no, was there analysis done and what's the finding? Yes, the first-home scheme has commissioned KPMG in 2023 and again this year to review whether or not the impact of the first-home scheme had been inflationary and whether or not it was meeting the affordable housing needs of those it was targeted to. And it found that there wasn't an inflationary impact of the first-home scheme. And that was confirmed by the review that was repeated again this year. Put that into consideration because something that's taking place in housing estates that are booked for sale. The housing estates that I live in, the houses were exempt there from the sale price that's actually registered. I mightn't show them. So can I just move to a separate subject? In relation to AAHBs and the unencumbered finance periods, right? I've raised this previously with the regulator here in this room and with the Secretary-General, Graeme Dial. When the – and from Hottigan, I was chasing this for a long time as was others and what it appears is that when they come out of the encumbered period – and I'm in favour of the work AAHBs are doing, I think it's good. But when the legislation was introduced 25 and 30 years ago, it doesn't appear there's any protection meant for when those units come out of the encumbered period. In other words, unencumbered finance period. It's free for the AAHB to have its own re-letting policy to, in one case, to brought in a private company. You know, to brought in a private company that they're now setting the rent and collecting the rent and running the show. So what have you done about that? I can't comment on the social housing schemes, Deputy, but what I will say is that the cost rental equity loan, which is how we support the approved housing bodies to make cost rental available. I'm going to just go back to the AAHBs. I'm talking about where money was – where money – where finance was put up front by the state and mainly built on local authority land or church lands, right? Or donated lands, you know, that came from the public at the end of the day. And approved housing bodies built these in the late 90s. And now these are coming of age. They're in the unencumbered period, right? And what I'm asking is – I've raised this with the department a number of times. And I'm not getting an answer on this as to what happened, right? What is the situation? I gave a case study to the department on this. And what I'm asking is, has the department – that's nearly two years ago since I first raised this – what has the department done to ensure that the investment by the state is protected in the future? In other words, that these homes that are, you know, where there's a public support, public support in terms of finance, department support, local authority support, that they don't finish up, that an approved housing body, you know, which has huge scope after the unencumbered period to do what they like with them. What has your department done about that? Well, in terms of affordable housing and the cost rental – I'm talking about the social ones. These were socials. Deputy, unfortunately, I'm just not familiar with the social housing schemes. Could I ask you? But I will go back and ask a colleague – Yes, the principal officer in your department is supposed to be looking after this, and the regulator. To get back to you on that. But can I just reiterate for you that in relation to cost rental equity loan, which is the means by which we support the AHBs to deliver cost rental homes, that the designation of cost rental is for a period of 50 years. And following that period, if the approved housing body chooses to remove that dwelling from the cost rental system, the subsidy that we've paid, the CREL, is repayable to the state. So that's in terms of going forward to the protection. Chair, could I just say just briefly that, you know, bearing in mind that this issue in relation to the social housing built by approved housing bodies, right, that from what we can ascertain to date, is there is no protection there in terms of the state's investment or local authority investment or public investment after the unencumbered period ends. And as a committee, that we would actually follow this up with the regulator. Chair, I think Ms Beekindle said she's going to come back to you with some information. Chair, I certainly will talk to colleagues back in the department, and someone will write to you, Deputy. Chair, I thank you. Chair, I thank you.