2026-05-19

141. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage to provide an update on the voids programme review committed to in the Government's housing plan. [37768/26]

On page 76 of the Government's housing plan, there is a commitment to develop a new voids funding programme that would "incentivise lower vacancy rates and faster turnaround times for vacant local authority stock". The plan was launched 187 days ago on 13 November 2025. In that time, only one action has been taken on the voids scheme.

I thank the Deputy for his question. The management and maintenance of local authority social homes, including pre-letting repairs and the retenanting of homes, is entirely a matter for each individual local authority, as set out in section 58 of the Housing Act 1966. Local authorities must also ensure tenanted homes comply with the provisions of the rental standards regulations. To that end, local authority elected members and officials must make adequate budgetary provision for housing repairs and cyclical maintenance utilising the significant housing rental income available to them as part of the annual budgetary process. That said, my Department is providing €260 million as a contribution towards the remediation and maintenance of local authority homes in 2026. This includes €40 million under the planned maintenance and voids programme, which is an increase of some 30% on the 2025 allocation. A total of €24 million of that sum is available for essential works to ensure vacant homes meet minimum standards, with the remaining €16 million available to support planned maintenance work programmes that are informed by stock condition surveys and delivered on a structured cycle of inspection, maintenance and repair. A revised funding approach, notified to local authorities earlier this year, will be introduced from 2027. It will effectively link funding available through the programme to more efficient stock management by local authorities. With unacceptable levels of homelessness and a growing demand for social housing, it is imperative we increase availability within the existing stock while new-build social housing reaches the levels required in the coming years. That can be achieved by local authorities. The most recent National Oversight and Audit Commission, NOAC, report on stock vacancy levels and turnaround times shows the current national average vacancy rate is 2.75%, with an average turnaround time of 35.56 weeks.

The Minister talked to colleagues earlier about policy. I launched a policy to return vacant, boarded-up homes to use in housing families. This is the low-hanging fruit and I still cannot understand why the Minister, his Department and the other Ministers in the Government do not tackle it. The voids programme for 2026 will allow for the return of 2,200 homes, with local authorities receiving only €11,000 per unit when there are more than 4,500 houses boarded up and vacant. Why is the Minister not being more ambitious? This is a fundamental disagreement. He will not fund local authorities to return those homes to use. This could be a success story. We could house 4,500 families if he were willing to put up the money.

Two local authorities have vacancy levels of less than 1%, with five having vacancy rates of less than 2%. There is no reason that every local authority cannot reach those targets. The data also shows that four local authorities have turnaround times of less than 18 weeks, compared with the average of 36 weeks. The average vacancy rate is nearly 3% but some local authorities are well above it. I want to see those voids brought back into use. They are empty local authority homes that were paid for by the State. There should be people living in them. Some local authorities are taking various approaches to them rather than getting them turned around as quickly as possible. We are now incentivising councils to complete those turnarounds.

The Minister mentioned the NOAC report. I will refer to some of the figures in that report. In 2024, there were 4,251 empty council houses, which was an increase from the previous year. One in four of those homes was empty longer than a year. I know of houses in my constituency that have been empty and boarded up for years. The problem is a lot of local authorities do not have the excess funding to bring the long-term, older, more complicated and more expensive homes back into use. If the Minister is only giving €11,000 per unit and the average cost, according to NOAC, is €31,000, from where will the local authorities get the funding shortfall? Many councils are struggling and do not have the money. Will the Minister commit to funding local authorities to do that work? Will he stop blaming them for not doing so when he has the ability to make the funds available to enable it? This is an easy win. I cannot understand why he will not do it.

It is not a question of ability; it is a question of duty. Under section 58 of the Housing Act 1966, it is the duty of the local authorities to keep those properties maintained.

They do not have the money to do it.

The previous Government gave significant money. There should not be any home in long-term disuse. Significant money was given by the previous Government for every home that was empty long term to be brought up to standard. How is it then, only a few years later, that there are more properties no longer up to standard and, in fact, in very poor condition? That should not be the case.

Some of them are up to 100 years old.

The figure of €11,000 is only an average. Each home should not take €11,000 to fix. The duty is on local authorities to maintain their stock. The Government is stepping in to help and support them but it should not really have to do so. The local authorities should be able to look after their own stock, as is their duty. The key point is that a lot of local authorities, if not almost every one of them, are not putting 100% of their rental income into maintaining their properties.

They cannot do so.

People in social housing homes are paying rent. They have a right to have that money put back into maintaining the properties, but the local authorities are not doing that, which they should be.

They cannot do it because the Government cut their funding.

Those renters need to know their money is going where it should be going.