Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government debate -
Wednesday, 21 Jun 2017

Housing and Rental Market: Discussion

I welcome the witnesses. The purpose of this morning's meeting is to discuss the impact of short-term lettings on Ireland's housing and rental market. The meeting will consist of two sessions. I welcome to our first session Mr. Richard Shakespeare and Dr. Dáithí Downey from Dublin City Council, and Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh, Mr. Neil Maher, Mr. Andrew Harkin, Ms Niamh Drew and Mr. Eamonn Kelly from the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government.

I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I call on Mr. Ó Cléirigh to make his opening statement.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

I thank the Chairman and the members of the committee for the invitation to attend today to discuss the impact of short-term letting on the residential rental sector. Accompanying me are Mr. Eamonn Kelly, senior adviser in the forward planning unit; Ms Niamh Drew, assistant principal officer in the planning policy unit; and Mr. Andrew Harkin from the rental market and approved housing bodies, AHB, regulation unit in the Department. Mr. Neil Maher, who was mentioned by the Chairman, is unable to attend today.

The strategy for the rental sector recognises the potential issue of significant numbers of properties being withdrawn from the long-term rental market, particularly in Dublin, for use as short-term tourism-related lettings and the negative impact of this on the supply and availability of residential rental accommodation. The growing use of online platforms, such as Airbnb, may, if not adequately regulated, facilitate and encourage this trend. The Department recognises that home sharing, which involves people providing overnight and short-term accommodation in their own homes, can be an important source of income helping home sharers to meet the costs of mortgages, rents or other household expenses and hence support tenure security. It also supports tourism and associated economic activity and even social and cultural exchange. Home sharing where the dwelling involved is the permanent or long-term residence of a person or family does not reduce the number of residential units available in the housing system and the economy. For this reason, planning regulations have traditionally recognised that home sharing and overnight guest accommodation is permissible in certain circumstances in houses but not apartments without a need to obtain planning permission.

That said, however, the Department is concerned that the growing availability and use of online short-term letting platforms and the potential commercial opportunities they provide may encourage landlords who normally provide residential rental accommodation to tenants to seek to obtain higher returns by ceasing residential letting and moving to short-term letting to tourist and business traveller customers. It may also encourage new investors to purchase residential units for short-term letting as an investment option, thereby reducing the number of residential units in the housing system. Both of these scenarios involve residential properties being lost to the residential housing system, meaning that less long term and secure accommodation will be available to the growing numbers of families and people who need it. The social and economic impacts of difficulties in accessing accommodation are significant and will not be compensated for by other economic benefits of the shift of residential units into short-term letting.

The Department is also concerned that the ability to use online platforms may facilitate or promote the use of housing units in multi-unit residential developments, such as apartments, for bed-and-breakfast accommodation contrary to the provisions of the Planning Acts and create planning enforcement difficulties for planning authorities. Generally, under the planning code, all development, including a material change of use, requires planning permission unless exempted under the Act or associated regulations. However, there is a specific exemption in Article 10(4) of the regulations which provides that within certain limitations or restrictions, development consisting of the use of a house for overnight guest accommodation is exempted development and, therefore, does not require planning permission. Apartments, however, do not benefit from this exemption.

Where there is a question as to what in any given case is or is not development, or is or is not exempted development, anybody can request a declaration under section 5 of the Act from the relevant planning authority, or from An Bord Pleanála on referral. When considering such a section 5 referral in a particular case last year, An Bord Pleanála determined that planning permission is required for the exclusive use of a residential apartment for short-term holiday lettings. The implications of this case raised a number of other regulatory and related issues, such as consumer protection, tax liability, residential tenancy regulation, support for tourism, and planning. Subsequent to that decision, the Department issued a circular on 22 December 2016 to bring this determination to the attention of planning authorities to ensure they were aware of the grounds on which the board reached its decision; the planning implications in terms of the requirement for such commercial use of residential units to be the subject of an application for planning permission; and the importance of a proactive approach to planning enforcement generally in this regard. The circular stated that planning authorities should take appropriate enforcement action under the planning code where it is brought to their attention that a particular property may be being used exclusively for short-term letting.

In order to address the unintended consequences of short-term lettings, particularly the withdrawal of supply from the residential rental market, the rental strategy committed to the establishment of a working group comprising representatives of relevant Departments, public bodies and wider interests in this area to provide full clarity on the appropriate regulation for management of short-term tourism related lettings, given the desired overall housing and rental policy objectives. The first meeting of the working group took place last Wednesday, 14 June. On foot of that meeting, it was agreed that the group will gather the available data to assess the scale of the issue; consider the approaches used in other jurisdictions; identify the areas in the country most at risk of negative impacts of short-term letting; and develop a clear policy approach based on housing priorities as outlined by the Government. On that basis, a circular will be prepared for issue in the near future to provide guidance to planning authorities on how to ensure that residential rental supply is protected in areas where demand is high when considering planning applications for short-term lets. The objective will be to limit the exclusive use of residential units for short-term letting, while facilitating those who are letting rooms in their own homes to do so, taking into account the specific issues associated with short-term letting in apartments and other issues such as standards and consumer protection. The group will also assess whether further guidance or changes to the regulation are required.

In addition to establishing a working group to consider short-term lettings, the Department has been engaging with Airbnb over the last months with a view agreeing a memorandum of understanding, MoU. While Airbnb is the most well-known and fastest growing operator in the sector, there are a number of other companies operating similar business models, such as Abode, Staycity, theKeyCollection and others. In discussions with the Department, Airbnb has expressed its concern at the potential loss of supply to the residential rental sector and has shown a willingness to work with the Department to develop a collaborative agreement. Discussions in this context are ongoing and, if successfully concluded, are intended to form the basis for putting similar arrangements in place with other online platforms. The Department’s joint commitment with Airbnb is to co-develop protocols and processes that encourage and facilitate home sharing while preventing unwelcome and unauthorised commercial rentals being advertised on the Airbnb platform. However, any MoU that may be agreed shall be in addition to requirements under the planning code. In this regard, it will not remove the obligation to obtain planning permission, as required, nor will it prohibit the reliance on an existing planning exemption, as appropriate, or the ability to seek clarification from the relevant planning authority as to whether planning permission is required.

I have tried to give an overview of the complex area that is short-term lettings and the Department's approach to it, and provide the committee with an update on developments, considerations and progress to date. I understand that Dublin City Council has some more quantitative information that will be useful for our discussion. My colleagues and I will be happy to take any questions.

I thank Mr. Ó Cleirigh. I welcome Mr. Richard Shakespeare to his first meeting of this committee. He brings with him vast experience. I hope we do not scare him off and that he will come back again after today. I invite him to make his opening remarks.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for the invitation to attend today. I introduce my colleague, Dr. Dáithí Downey, head of housing policy in the housing department of Dublin City Council, DCC.

It is not clear what definition of "short-term lettings" the joint committee is using, or what impacts it wishes to consider. In preparing this response, I have assumed that the committee is primarily interested in lettings of less than six months' duration and that its primary concern is the potential adverse impact, if any, of developments in the short-term lettings market on the availability of more traditional lettings which could meet the longer term housing needs of households. Finally, I have presumed that the committee is interested in the question of whether there is a need for greater regulatory control of the short-term letting market.

It is important to state at the outset that short-term lettings are an important part of any properly functioning housing and rental market. The availability of these lettings fulfils a key role in meeting particular accommodation demand. There has always been a market for short-term lettings in Ireland and especially in the main urban centres. The short-term lettings market operates as an important secondary element in a properly functioning accommodation system. In Dublin, this market segment includes hotels and developments in which short-stay arrangements in self-contained residential accommodation are regularly available. Such accommodation is required to meet the demand for short-stay residential space in Dublin for personal, work, study, business and tourism reasons. It is important that Dublin's growing demand for such accommodation is met by a responsive, flexible and quality supply. Dublin city’s development plan for 2016 to 2021, therefore, includes policy objectives for the appropriate planning and development of short-stay accommodation in its various forms including new "apart-hotel" provision.

It is clear that the recent phenomenon of Internet-hosted data-centric technologies has disrupted the traditional business model for short-term lettings. This is part of the new collaborative economy with peer-to-peer platforms for the listing, discovery and booking of short-stay residential accommodation. This has created a new marketplace for an additional form of lodging or accommodation that includes options to use shared space in private residential accommodation, both rental and owner occupied, and also allows users to share and sell residential space of their own or to provide access to shared residential space. The global market leader in online platforms for sharing and selling space in private residential accommodation is Airbnb. It acts as an intermediary between consumers and producers to reduce the risk and cost of offering a home as a short-term letting, which enables suppliers, primarily home owners, to participate in the commercial market for short-term residential accommodation. Airbnb reduces transaction costs for both consumers and producers and provides a feedback and reputation mechanism that allows for a safer and more streamlined transaction.

Dublin City Council has undertaken some preliminary research on the extent of Airbnb activity in Dublin, which was presented to a meeting of the council’s housing strategic policy committee on 10 March 2017. A copy of that presentation has been circulated to the joint committee. The available data suggests that a total of 6,729 listings exist on Airbnb for all of Dublin, with 5,377 listings located within the Dublin City Council area. Of these, 50% are listings for "entire houses or apartments only". It has been suggested that the development of Airbnb and other similar platforms is having a serious adverse effect on the supply of properties available to meet the longer term housing needs of households. It is not clear that this is necessarily the case for the following reasons: First, Dublin City has 211,591 occupied housing units according to census 2016. They comprise 105,273 households in owner occupation - roughly 50% - and 62,865 households in private rental - 30% - with the balance being a combination of social, rental and other living arrangements. This compares with just 5,377 listings on Airbnb for rooms and-or entire apartments or houses in Dublin city. Second, it is likely that Airbnb and similar platforms have, at least to some extent, displaced more traditional approaches to managing short-term lettings.

Third, a particular strength of Airbnb and similar platforms is they facilitate short-term letting of vacant rooms in a very efficient manner. It is possible that prior to the availability of these platforms, property owners would not have considered renting spare rooms to the same extent. Airbnb also facilitates very short-term letting of entire apartments or houses while an owner is away on holidays, for example. This contributes to a more efficient housing market and has no adverse effect on the availability of properties to meet the longer term housing needs of households as in the absence of an Airbnb-type platform, the property would simply remain vacant until the owner returns. Short-term letting where the dwelling involved is the permanent or long-term residence of a person or family does not therefore reduce the number of residential units available in the economy. Home sharing or the letting of a room or rooms within a home can be an important source of income, helping home sharers to meet the cost of mortgages, rent or other household expenses. This can support their tenure security. It also supports tourism and associated economic activity, and even social and cultural exchange.

Despite the significant market efficiency gains associated with Airbnb and other sharing platforms in the use of otherwise under-utilised residential space and the ability it gives home owners to generate revenue, there are concerns about the economic and welfare effects of the operation of these platforms on the residential housing market. These can be broadly grouped into the following areas. These are the impact on housing affordability in local rental and home ownership markets; the production of negative externalities or adverse impacts on local neighbourhoods associated with too high a concentration of short-term letting activity; and the emergence of a shadow lodging sector, where providers may evade compliance with established regulations and taxation.

Available evidence tends to suggest Airbnb activity has a high impact on the vacancy and occupancy rates in residential housing in particular neighbourhoods but a more marginal effect on prices. Airbnb has also allowed home owners in residential areas outside the city centre tourist areas to participate in the tourism accommodation market. This is an important feature of Airbnb activity in Dublin that has allowed for short-term lettings in suburban locations not immediately associated with tourism. The local effects of Airbnb and other platforms on house prices, rents, neighbourhood livability and economy, and the consequences for incumbent businesses and residents, are important empirical questions. Currently there is limited available evidence upon which decision makers and the public can rely. Dublin City Council is committed to undertaking further research into these matters in 2017 and we will work directly with Airbnb to undertake a survey on attitudes and opinions among service users in Dublin. We have also engaged consultants to undertake an economic analysis of the scope and scale of the collaborative economy accommodation market in Dublin.

Dublin City Council is a member of the recently established working group on short-term lettings, which is chaired by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. This group aims to provide clarity on the appropriate regulatory approach from a planning perspective for short-term lettings to address unintended adverse consequences of these lettings. The group is expected to report in the third quarter of 2017.

I will take two members for the first round of questions. When answering, witnesses normally reference the member who asked the question.

I thank the witnesses for coming here and sharing their knowledge. Both of the papers before us are very interesting. I will make a few comments, if I may, before getting into the detail of the questions. I read all the submissions before us today and there is a certain trend running through them. There is basically a need for some regulatory control for the very short-term lets. In every submission we have received, people speak of regulatory control. There is a need for quality and standards in accommodation. We must be realistic and responsive to demand; we should be honest and realise that Airbnb works because there is a demand for it. There has always been a demand in cities for short-term letting, which serves a purpose, stimulating economic activity and tourism. It is good that there are spin-offs for people in the short term with regard to the buying of commodities and goods in the cities. There are many benefits, which is very important. There are short-term lets in any city, which is important. We do not want any stagnation in the city and we want it enlivened by a cross-section of people and different traditions and backgrounds. This feeds into a very positive living city, which is important for Dublin, which has made great in-roads in that regard. I am singling out Dublin for a moment as Dublin City Council produced one of the documents.

We must be responsive to the realities on the ground and the demands that exist for accommodation. We should not get hung up on the word "Airbnb" as there are many other portals and ways to book short-term accommodation. That relates to a flaw as the Department mentions a memorandum of understanding. There are more people out there who we do not know about or quantify who may engage in very short lets. Perhaps there should be a memorandum of understanding with the sector, which requires public consultation and engagement in a broad sense with the sector, or at least in as much as we can make contact with the sector. That is a difficulty in itself. There must be flexibility in that respect.

We can set a context. In October 2016, An Bord Pleanála made a significant decision on short-term lettings. That decision arose, as we know, from a section 5 declaration that went to the board and not the council, seeking clarification relating to a matter pertaining to a property in Temple Bar. It is worth noting what the board stated, as it is important. Anybody can seek a section 5 declaration, as witnesses know. The board decided the use of the entire residential apartment on a year-round basis for a series of short-term holiday lettings constituted a change in use. It stated such a change of use raised planning considerations that are materially different from the planning considerations relating to the normal use of residential apartments and the change of use is material, constituting development under the Planning and Development Act 2000 as amended. Finally, the board indicated the development was not exempt and therefore required planning permission. That is the basis on which we work as it is what the independent planning board stated.

Going through the submissions, there is a concern that people comply with planning, health and safety issues, general regulations to do with tenancy and taxation. These are underlying issues, although we must be very careful with our remit. There is also the issue of the shadow lodging sector and people evading compliance with regulations, rules or taxation. We must also draw a reference to Dublin City Council, whose development plan goes from 2016 to 2021. Perhaps it will share any specific objectives in the county development plan that preclude some of what we are discussing. Is there room for change and should there be change? I know that is more a planning than housing issue.

I have a couple of questions. Mr. Shakespeare mentioned a consultant and that work will be really interesting. There is a lack of hard factual evidence that we, as policymakers, can rely on. There is much anecdotal evidence. I took the time yesterday to examine what is happening in Barcelona, London and Madrid. Airbnb is nothing new and it is all over the world. There are regulations and caps in London, for example, on the amount of nights one can stay. There are imaginative ways to deal with this. When does Mr. Shakespeare envisage the report he mentioned will be completed? It would be very beneficial for us to look at that at another time. The personnel from the Department mentioned a memorandum of understanding with a particular named group - Airbnb - but that is not good enough and it will not capture all we want, with all due respect. There must be a bigger engagement with the sector.

The witnesses both touched on the reality that due to the financial crash and other matters, many people are renting rooms in private homes to supplement or pay their mortgages. They would be on the street if they did not do it. It is a reality we must recognise and acknowledge.

There are many people engaged in Airbnb who need that income to pay their mortgages and keep a roof over their heads. It is a complex issue. In terms of the reports to date on this issue, there is a lack of detailed, hard, factual evidence that policymakers need to make policy.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. At the outset, I would like to declare that I am a tourism service provider in the Wicklow area. As such, I have an understanding of the importance of Airbnb and other platforms to the tourism industry. They are a vital part of the industry.

In terms of this discussion, we need to focus on the impact of short-term lettings on the housing crisis. In this regard, we need to drill down into the statistics on short lettings to determine the number of short-term lettings of premises on an almost full-time basis. No one has an issue with people letting out a room in their own house or letting out their home for a time when they are on holidays as neither of these practices has an influence on the housing crisis. What is having an impact on the housing crisis is owners of multiple properties letting their properties on a short-term basis throughout the year. What work is being undertaken by Dublin City Council or the Department to determine what proportion of the 6,700 apartments or houses in Dublin are being let on a short-term basis over a lengthy timeframe? That is where we need to focus our attention, including from a planning and Revenue point of view.

It was mentioned earlier that the Department is looking at how other countries are dealing with this issue. We are all aware of the measures that have been introduced in London, Berlin, New York and Barcelona. In terms of the figures presented today, there is a significant increase in Airbnb and short-term letting in the tourism hotspots. According to the figures, 5,700 properties are based mainly in the Dublin city area. From the witnesses' point of view, how can we get to where I believe we need to be from a housing crisis point of view? As I said, there are other issues involved in terms of planning and Revenue, but in terms of the committee's focus today, the housing crisis, we need to get to the people who are letting their properties on a short-term basis over a lengthy timeframe.

I invite the witnesses to respond, starting with Mr. Ó Cléirigh.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

As stated by Senator Boyhan, there is agreement around the issues are and what needs to be done. We are conscious, as I am sure is Dublin City Council, the remit of which, in terms of the Dublin area, is broader than that of the Department, of the balance to be met between the economic benefits of short-term letting in terms of broader economic issues and the tourism sector and the potential negative impacts on housing. As I said, these are not substitutes for each other. In other words, the benefits that derive from a more vibrant tourism economy do not necessarily accrue to people who lose out arising from problems in the housing sector.

I agree that the problem is not limited to Airbnb. I listed a few of the other providers. There are more. I have heard there are up to 15 online providers. There are also a number of providers that are not online and have been operating in this area for some time. In regard to the memorandum of understanding, MOU, it is not the Department's strategy for dealing with this issue. It has come about because of the willingness and the desire of Airbnb to engage on this issue because it acknowledges the problem arising has implications for its operations. We are engaging with Airbnb. If we do reach an agreement with it, we will use that as a basis for similar sorts of arrangements with other providers. However, that is independent of the working group which is chaired by the Department. It is examining the issue not from the point of agreements with individual providers but from the point of view of an overall regulatory framework and approach to planning for and management of the sector.

In terms of what is going on in other jurisdictions, this is currently the focus of the working group. It is interesting to note what is happening in other places. Mostly, this issue is dealt with city by city. What the jurisdictions have opted to put in place varies according to their particular issues. As stated by Deputy Casey, the reaction differs in areas where there are high levels of tourism versus areas where there are serious housing problems. Typically, what we are seeing is registration of short-term rental providers. Of the actual registration of hosts, multiple listings in many places are not permitted and listings that are not in the principal private residence are not permitted. By "not permitted" I mean they require other approval. They are considered to be commercial activity rather than short-term letting on a home-sharing basis.

Another issue is nights booked limits, which relates to the point about what is happening in London, and the licensing of the platforms. In some jurisdictions, platforms such as Airbnb are licensed. The manner in which they operate and the information they provide to planning authorities and government can be controlled through that licensing arrangement. For example, in some jurisdictions Airbnb is only allowed to facilitate people who are registered providers or licensed providers. In other jurisdictions, such as Barcelona, enforcement is very tough. There is a huge effort there now to crack down on unlicensed provision.

The working group will be looking at all these issues. At the end of the day, we need an approach that is driven from a policy perspective, the priority being protecting accommodation in the rental sector and the housing system, and based on data and evidence, although that evidence is not easy to collect. As information is power, that information is not readily available. The approach taken will also need to be specific to the specific context. In other words, it will be different in practice and reality in Dublin from what it will be in a rural area. I am sure Dublin City Council can provide some information on the question of what proportion of hosts are letting multiple properties as compared with those who are letting single properties.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

On the specific question raised by Senator Boyhan, we hope to have that piece of work completed by October 2017. It involves a joint SPC meeting from the housing, planning and economic development side of the house. The intention is to set up a cross-party working group of councillors and officials to consider proposals to be put to the Department in terms of regulation and so on.

In regard to Deputy Casey's question, I refer him to point 4 on page 7 of the PowerPoint presentation.

From drilling down into the 5,377 listings for houses and apartments recently and frequently booked, highly available and where the host has multiple listings, we estimate 10% of those are a business. Roughly speaking that comes to 540 properties.

Is the source of these data www.insideairbnb.com?

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

Yes.

When the committee tries to use www.daft.ie, we are told it is not a proper analysis of the market. I am not sure who is behind insideairbnb.com and if it is accurate information, which is a concern. Is there an independent analysis of the figures for the short-term letting market?

Dr. Dáithí Downey

Airbnb does not provide any data to Dublin City Council. The data in our presentation originate from an organisation called insideairbnb.com. It describes itself as independent and non-commercial. It allows a set of tools to be used online to explore activity on the Airbnb website. The data in the presentation are a snapshot of listings for Dublin available as of February 2017. There will be another data release pretty soon from insideairbnb.com. A gentleman by the name of Murray Cox is the originator of insideairbnb.com.

The data show the level activity on the Airbnb website for the categories of listings that would suggest potentially short-term letting activity. This distribution is shown on our PowerPoint presentation. What is useful from the distribution maps is that it shows the geography of Airbnb activity in Dublin city. One can see the concentration of accommodation offering in the city centre area attached to areas of cultural or other tourist activity. We will be commissioning an independent study of the scale of the collaborative economy, including other platforms as well as Airbnb. We will bring to bear several key questions, regarding not only the regulatory impact on planning development but also the impact on the overall dynamic of the housing market. In particular, we will be examining the sometimes challenging spillover effects which can occur where there is a concentration of Airbnb activity in an area which may be pushing up the price of residential space in that area and whether that is having a negative impact on affordability issues in rental markets, as well as with house prices. We are primarily concerned with trying to identify whether there is a significant adverse effect on the rental market in particular locales, given the affordability challenges present today in Dublin.

I thank the delegations for their presentations. I am not opposed to short-term home-sharing lettings as a kind of a tourism product. Everyone is convinced of the merits of this. However, when we talk about the collaborative economy, there is an attempt to present these business models as almost like the old co-operatives, like some kind of organic, folksy and nice way of doing business. This is not what we are talking about. Whether it is Amazon, Betfair, Betdaq, Uber or platforms like Airbnb, this is a new multi-billion euro business model that is beginning to take hold in a range of sectors of the economy. It is about driving down costs, as well as avoiding or evading, within or without the law, existing regulations which govern traditional sectors of the economy. These are all causing a whole host of regulatory difficulties for countries. None of that is new to us. We need to acknowledge there is something significant here with which we are trying to grapple.

The concern many of us have is not with the person who lets out the room or the house for a short time. No one has any difficulty with that, so long as they pay their taxes, are regulated, etc. Our concern is that the practice in other jurisdictions, from which we have more information than we have here, suggests there are commercial landlords using these platforms either to generate higher incomes or to avoid tax and regulations. That is the nub of what we are trying to get at.

I am disappointed with Airbnb. I met Airbnb in January and outlined the information I felt it needed to put in the public domain to demonstrate whether we have a problem. What is clear from everything said today is that we just do not know if we have a problem because we do not have the data. That is not the fault of anyone in this room today. I set out clearly to Airbnb that if it wanted to demonstrate good faith to politicians and to statutory bodies, it should give us the information it has. For example, how many units of accommodation are available to let for a year, for between six months and a year, for between three months and six? How many units of accommodation are not the principal private dwellings of the owners? We need to be putting pressure on Airbnb to give this information to either the working group or to put it into the public domain. Until we have that, and while the independent study outlined by Dr. Dáithí Downey will be helpful in this regard, we are not going to know whether we have a problem and, if so, where it is situated and its impacts.

I am also frustrated at the Department. I do not know whether this is the fault of the Minister or the Secretary General. The Bord Pleanála decision was in October last year. The circular to the local authorities was in December. We were told by the Taoiseach and the Minister in January that a working group has been set up. It only had its first meeting last week, however. That is on the basis of the information we have been given today and the reply to a parliamentary question which I got late last night.

I am not trying to be antagonistic with anyone presenting to this committee. However, given the level of pressure on the private rental market, particularly in Dublin, the level of the housing and homelessness crisis and the number of families being put out of rental accommodation because of notices to quit by buy-to-let landlords with distressed mortgages, there is a level of urgency with this. It seems to me that, seven months on from the Bord Pleanála decision, no one is taking this seriously. I will say to the Minister and the Secretary General tomorrow that there is a level of urgency in this matter which cannot wait until September, October or November.

I am also concerned about talk of a memorandum of understanding. It is self-regulation. We know Airbnb in Barcelona, for example, was constantly flouting the law. It has just been fined €600,000 there for allowing 7,000 unregistered short-term lets on its platform of 16,000. The idea of Airbnb talking nicely to us is what it does. These are professionals and it is a big corporate organisation which has a particular business model. I do not want to be singling it out but it is the one we know more about. In addition to existing planning regulations being enforced, be it the local authorities and the circular, the Department is looking at drafting a memorandum of understanding and applying it to Airbnb and other platforms. The experience from other European cities with high tourism product and high homelessness problems, however, is that self-regulation will not work. Strong regulation in itself is not working in cities like Barcelona which has just doubled the number of inspectors it has.

I hope this committee sends a strong signal, which is taken back to the Secretary General and to the Minister, that we need regulation. That regulation needs to be along the lines of what is operating in other jurisdictions, once we have the data to identify the scale of the problem which we may or may not have here. That includes setting a number of days but also having a sufficient level of disincentive for people who break those rules and some formal regulation of the platforms themselves.

I know the Department is busy and there is significant pressure on it because of the housing and the homeless crisis. Will officials tell us why it took so long to have the first meeting of that working group? What is the timescale for finalising a report and bringing back proposals, whether to the Minister or the committee, for consideration? Given the behaviour of some of the platforms, especially Airbnb in other jurisdictions, why does the Department believe a memorandum of understanding will be a useful tool rather than clear regulations?

I am interested to know if Dublin City Council has any data to show that there has been an increase in the total number of short-term lets, from the limited data it has been able to access. There seems to be some census data to suggest that there has been some increase. This is not just commercial landlords misusing such platforms to evade various kinds of regulation to make more profit. Are we seeing an increase in the overall number?

My point is similar to the point just made. The witnesses do not need me to tell them that we have a housing crisis. There are many commercial factors contributing to that crisis, and undoubtedly this is one of them. A decision was made by An Bord Pleanála seven months ago. The Department says that it contacted local authorities and asked them to be vigilant and proactive on enforcement based on the decision made by An Bord Pleanála, the reasons for it and the conditions associated with it. It was said that the Department was issuing a circular in the coming weeks with a process by which to deal with future planning applications. The Department is asking local authorities to be proactive on enforcement, but there seems to be no effort to correlate the information from these platforms to ascertain what properties are being used for this purpose, where they are and if they have the relevant planning permission to do so. It is as simple as that. The urgency that is needed and required across a wide range of areas in terms of how we deal with this crisis is not evident, and it certainly is not evident in this instance.

I have no issue with the information and data that Dublin City Council has. I do not know where else it can be got. Of the 6,729 units, how many of them were previously used for long-term lettings? Can that be ascertained? If they have been identified in this exercise, why are local authorities, which have the relevant expertise, resources, funds and personnel, not ascertaining what progress, if any, can be made? Can the rule of law be enforced vis-à-vis the Bord Pleanála decision?

The Government is trying its best to deal with this issue. We are doing our best to try to inform it and push it in certain directions on other policy issues. It can address this issue, but the least we expect is some form of urgency. This crisis has been ongoing for the past three years. In this instance the contributing factor is accepted. I do not know if we necessarily need consultants to tell us the effect this is having on the rental sector. When I hear the word "consultants" I think of time and money being wasted. There is relevant, professional expertise within local authorities. We expect that they are put there to do a job that they are able to do and can do what is set out in their contracts, which is to ascertain the information, make it available to the executive and allow the members and the executive to make a decision together to address the issue. We do not have the time, space or money to wait on a consultant's report to tell us what is patently obvious to me and, I am sure, to many others. Primarily, my focus of attention is on the Department and its focus and implementation of the decision that was made by An Bord Pleanála and how it is seeking to rectify that to regulate the industry. The local authorities have the power within their own remit to do that. We hear of memorandums of understanding with Airbnb while a working group that was promised by the Taoiseach last January on foot of a Dáil question and that was to be put in place as soon as possible to deal with this issue has only met once. It is not good enough, and whoever is responsible needs to own up to that fact, to apologise, and to put in place a means by which this will be addressed. We do not need to be wasting our time on this issue any more than any other issue. Just do it, go ahead with it and get it done. Do not be annoying us about it.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

On the points raised by Deputy Ó Broin, the working group's commitment under the rental strategy envisaged that it would deliver its report by quarter 2. I am not aware of a statement to the effect that it had been set up in January. I am not aware that statement was ever made, and it was not set up in January.

I did not say there was a statement that it had been set up. The Taoiseach and the Minister told us in January that it was to be set up. That was five months ago and we are now approaching the end of quarter 2. We are told in today's report that the working group had its first meeting last week and is now starting to gather the data. Given the urgency of this, five months on from when we were told that this group was to be established, I do not understand why it has taken so long.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

There are many other things in the rental strategy as well. Many pieces of work are going on in other working groups, for example, on the taxation of rental providers.

That is the Department of Finance working group, in principle. It might involve some of the witness's staff.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

It is chaired by the Department of Finance but I can assure the Deputy-----

I will let the Deputy come back in, but please let the witness finish.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

There is significant input coming from my section and from the Department. It is secondary, but there is also a working group on receivership and the protection of tenants' rights through receivership processes involving their tenancies. There is work ongoing with the Department of Health on the fair deal scheme and the possible mobilisation of vacant properties. Those are only some of the issues on the supply side. We have planned and sequenced our activities and we are where we are.

In terms of the timeframe, we would expect to have a new circular issued within quarter 3, and also the report of the working group. It is not the case that we are only looking at the existing regulations and a memorandum of understanding approach. In the working group we are looking at more guidance aimed at better enforcement and compliance with the existing system, but also potential changes to the regulation and possible legislation. That goes to the point that was raised by Deputy Cowen in earlier questions about information. The information is not really available. There are multiple platforms with multiple players involved. We could carry out surveys, but other jurisdictions use a registration process as the best way to gather information. That is something we will consider, but we cannot just decide to do it. For registration to be implemented, legislation will be required. Equally, we can ask Airbnb to provide us with information, but we cannot require it to provide us with information if there is no legislative basis for it. The question of data is something we are working on in the working group. It will be dealt with in the report and we will see what changes to legislation are necessary or look at possible new legislation.

In terms of enforcement capacity, in Barcelona - the example Deputy Ó Broin gave - the local authority doubled its on-the-street inspection team from 20 to 40 to look at and try to find properties.

If we are to do it-----

Is Mr. Ó Cleirigh saying that is what needs to be done here?

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

No. What I am saying is-----

Of what relevance is it then?

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

-----that what we need to do is put in place a regulation system that provides the information which makes enforcement and compliance easier without having to do that kind of door-to-door inspection of properties. That is what we will look at in the working group.

Regarding the timeline for the report, when does the Department hope to have the report completed?

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

In the third quarter. I recognise we will not meet the deadline that was established in the rental strategy.

Mr. Ó Cléirigh also said local authorities should be vigilant and cognisant of An Bord Pleanála's decision and its duty as a local authority on foot of being informed. Is the Department relying on the public or others to inform it of the activity of certain properties or would there be a proactive response on the part of the enforcement offices of local authorities?

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

Perhaps Mr. Shakespeare will address that question.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

We are reliant on complaints being made to us. So far this year, we have had 23 complaints out of a total of 665 enforcement complaints, representing about 4% or 5% of what we have had. They are investigated and followed through. One of the big problems with the enforcement side of things is the fact that when one brings it to its logical conclusion and one is satisfied that an offence has been committed, there is a threshold of proof for criminal prosecution which can be difficult to get to. We need to establish that burden of proof before we take a criminal prosecution.

As we have heard, there may be taxation issues, there are regulatory issues and there are planning issues now on foot of the decision of the board. Does Mr. Shakespeare know in the Department how many cases have been taken country-wide, if any, to date?

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

The only one I am aware of is our decision that was referred to An Bord Pleanála in 2016.

There has been just one.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

Yes.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

I am afraid I do not have the information on the number of cases that have been taken. Is the Deputy talking about enforcement cases or-----

The working group met last week. Did Mr. Ó Cléirigh not point out at that meeting that it has had 40 cases, it could have 400, it needs to ascertain where this is going and whether, as Mr. Ó Cléirigh himself said, there is adequate personnel available within the enforcement offices of local authorities, whether more are needed, whether the working group needs funding from the Department of Finance, with which the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government is discussing other issues such as preparations for incentives for landlords, and so forth? We still do not know. There has only been one case, and that was the Bord Pleanála one. Despite the fact that circulars have been issued and that the Department has asked enforcement officers within local authorities to be vigilant, has there not been another case since?

If Mr. Ó Cléirigh does not have those details to hand, he might come back to the committee with them. He was probably not expected to have those details here.

May I ask just one supplementary question? It is more for information than anything else. My understanding of planning enforcement is that a member of the public must make a legal complaint by filling out the complaint form before a local authority can inspect, so I-----

Deputy-----

I ask the Chairman to let me ask the question. Again, it is just so I have the information right. Are there any statutory powers that would allow a local authority to enter and inspect a property that it thought was not compliant? If so, could the witnesses let the committee know what those legal powers would be?

I will take the next round of questions and let the witnesses answer the Deputy's question in the next round, if that is all right.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I am conscious that the working group is in place and has not come back with its report yet, but I have concerns over An Bord Pleanála's decision. I am concerned in turn about the likes of Airbnb and the need for a register. Have Airbnb and other such companies been informed of An Bord Pleanála's decision? Surely, the decision affects virtually every house. When houses were being built and even up until now, it is not being taken into account that houses that are being built might need some kind of additional permission. Has this been taken into account? Have Airbnb and all similar companies been informed that they could be in breach as a result of some of the properties they are using? I would love to know whether any action is to be taken on that. I believe there needs to be a register and people need to be signed up. The working group is probably looking at this idea.

I am also conscious that many people are renting out rooms in their own houses. They have mortgages. I do not think many of these people are registered or paying taxes on their rental income, etc. They are just trying to clear mortgages. Whether we like it or not, that is the reality on the ground. If it is the case that there is a decision that states that one should have to apply for permission from An Bord Pleanála, many of these people are in breach in many ways.

I also wish to ask the witnesses about student accommodation. We are seeing an awful lot of people getting permission to build student accommodation at present and there are huge numbers of applications. Is there a means these people can use, an equivalent of Airbnb, during times when the student accommodation is not occupied? Is this an avenue the working group is looking at? I am not sure whether space is available in such accommodation. I know that some of the student accommodation, particularly around DCU, with which I am more familiar, tends to be utilised during the off season as much as during term time, but there are cases in which it very much depends on the time of the year the college or otherwise is occupied. I am curious as to whether there is any scope to look at this. Are there pressure areas in the likes of Dublin City Council where these short-term lettings will have a huge impact? Are the witnesses considering this idea where there might be a concentration of these companies coming in and trying to get short-term lettings in very high-demand spots? If this is the case, it obviously has an impact on the likes of hotels because in many ways it is a way of undercutting hotels. Is what the hotel is doing in breach of any legislation in terms of the process it must go through and Airbnb? Other European countries are probably more familiar with this; we are probably relatively new to this compared to others. I am curious about those questions.

I agree with the previous speakers. My concern is that the local authority should be given some incentive to work with families. Like the rest of us, I regularly deal with families who come into my clinic. There are families who have room at home for their children to stay. A person living in a local authority house who has family members who are homeless cannot take them in because if he or she tries do so, the rent goes up, he or she qualifies for nothing and there is no incentive. Why not give families, if they have room, an incentive on a short-term basis? When they are on the local authority housing list, the local authority is aware of it. They should be given some kind of help so that they can stay in the family home. At present there is no incentive for anyone to keep family members in the family home. People go looking for somewhere, they get their full rent allowance and entitlements, and that is fine, but we have a shortage of houses. I have been dealing with an elderly lady who had a daughter late in life. She cannot even take her family in because they are telling her she will be over and could end up getting in trouble with the local authority. The witnesses need to look at such cases, even in general and on a short-term basis. I understand this cannot be done on a long-term basis but, while we have a crisis, surely common sense will prevail. If a family member has a spare room, there should be some incentive for him or her to be able to keep a family member there for a few months or a year until the local authority can help them. There is no help.

It is a serious issue. We have a massive shortage of houses. I get frightened when I hear of various working groups, surveys and so on. People need to get themselves together. Common sense is needed. We need to give the local authorities the help they need, whether through introducing incentives or telling them they have, say, six or 12 months to try to do something. There is nothing there. That is why we are falling down. Until we start to do things like that, the housing crisis is only going to get worse.

We talk about student accommodation. My home town of Carlow is very much a student town. We have two third level education entities. I have looked for short-term accommodation for families but people will not accept rent allowance or the housing assistance payment. Something needs to be done by local authorities. If there was some incentive, even in the short term, it could provide a solution. The witnesses might come back to me on that.

Deputy Danny Healy-Rae is our final speaker.

Has it become apparent since the rent caps were put in place in Dublin and other places that landlords are making fewer units available for social housing? Has it driven them into the Airbnb market? I am being told it has. There has been a lot of criticism of landlords from many sectors, which they feel is unfair. All through the bad times and the tough times, they made units available for social housing. They feel they are being denied the ability to increase their rents because of this cap and so they are making their properties available for Airbnb rather than social housing. Are there figures available that substantiate what I have been told?

Another issue regarding social housing and local authorities is where the Department still demands four layers of approval. Local authorities can opt for fewer stages of approval - perhaps one or two - but there is a stipulation which hurts them in that if some extra cost arises, after they have signed up to the two layers of approval, they must foot the bill themselves and they do not have the funds to manage that. The Department is being very unfair in this regard.

The third thing that is hurting many people, in particular people in their 50s, is the grant aid for the elderly is only available to people on reaching 65 or 66 years.

We will not be discussing that today. That is not on today's agenda.

I will only be a second, thank you.

I will not ask the Department to answer that during the meeting. It can come back to the Deputy afterwards. We are trying to stick to the short-term lettings if that is okay with the Deputy.

Is there any evidence of landlords moving from long-term to short-term lettings? I find it hard to find any evidence.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

It is difficult to say because when we look across the Residential Tenancy Board registrations and compare it with information on Airbnb, we cannot see the end of tenancies under RTB registrations, we can only see them beginning. We do not know what is happening. On the face of it, it appears there are a growing number of tenancies and of landlords registered with the RTB. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that people are moving. I have certainly stayed in Airbnb accommodation which was clearly previously used for long-term tenancy. We do not have the information. We can look across at other jurisdictions and we can see that it has happened. They have information and it is likely that it is happening here. Perhaps Dr. Downey might have something more concrete to add.

Dr. Dáithí Downey

Unfortunately I do not, but there is a growing body of what we might call anecdata, or circumstantial data, which demonstrate that there is a growing short-term lettings market in the capital. There is a considerable number of proposed developments for aparthotels and a number of companies have announced their intentions to develop property specifically for short-term rental. I would return to my earlier comments that what we are looking at here is trying to identify the locales and areas where the concentration of peer-to-peer platform, collaborative economy rental for accommodation is having an impact on prices and whether that impact is negative or driving rental inflation and whether it is taking out of circulation or use properties that would otherwise be available for longer-term rental.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

To return to Deputy Cowen's point about enforcement and letters, section 152 of the Act refers to this. For clarification, section A is where someone makes a representation in writing to us, but part B allows that if an authority becomes aware, we may take action and issue a warning letter.

Would Mr. Ó Cléirigh like to come back in?

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

Regarding Deputy Ellis's questions, I am not aware if the decision by An Bord Pleannála has been proactively transmitted to Airbnb and others, but I believe it is publicly available and has been published by An Bord Pleanála and any of the entities with which I have engaged are well aware of it. The question around what individual Airbnb hosts understand are planning requirements is very relevant and something we will look at. Even in the discussions with Airbnb around the memorandum of understanding, if we get to a memorandum of understanding, the clarification of planning requirements for hosts, what is and what is not exempt and what permissions are required, will be one of the things that will be in it.

We have not looked at the use of student accommodation.

Mr. Eamonn Kelly

We fully support using student accommodation during summer months when students are not there. This time last year, we issued a circular to all local authorities suggesting that while we cannot control permissions that have already been granting but from now on, we have given recommendations to local authorities that they should consider tourist use during the summer in their grant permission. That has already been issued and recommendations have already been given. We have given a draft planning condition and it is up to the county councils to implement that themselves when they are granting them.

The alternative would be that they would have to go back to the planners and request a change of use. Is that the normal procedure?

Mr. Eamonn Kelly

It would depend entirely on what the permission was and if there were conditions restricting it, it depends on a case-by-case basis. For all new ones, we have recommended to local authorities that they do that. It is a great idea. Do colleagues on Dublin City Council have anything to add?

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

No, what Mr. Kelly says is perfectly correct. The procedure would be to come back and seek a change of use if it was not permitted previously. Off hand, I do not know how much is potentially available during the summer because the way in which many of these have been built in the past has been using public private partnership between the university and an investor and they sell on the downtime, between the middle of May to September, quite heavily so I do not know how much of that would be available.

They sell quite heavily in the downtime between the middle of May and early September. I do not know how much is available but if they wanted to maximise it they would need to-----

There seem to be a huge number of applications for student accommodation. There is one on Gardiner Street and more coming on stream in Ballymun. This might help the short-term situation.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

I do not disagree with the Deputy. According to the HEA there is a shortage of some 18,000 student bed spaces, which is gradually being addressed.

The Airbnb figures are the only data available and they state that south Dublin does not have an issue as there are only 220 listings. Fingal probably does not have an issue, with 500, and Dún Laoghaire is in a similar position with only 600. In Dublin city, 5,400 properties are listed on Airbnb. The magic number, that is when a person breaks the regulations and becomes liable for tax, is 90 days but 2,581 are available for 90 days or more. Of them, 1,375 entire properties are available so there is an issue in Dublin city and it is causing a significant impact on the housing crisis and the short-term rental market. We need to progress things more quickly than we are doing at the moment. I do not believe there is such an impact outside Dublin city.

Has the Department asked Airbnb for the data we want? While there is no statutory requirement to give it the Department, the Department could be quite persuasive and tell Airbnb that it cannot have an MOU if it is not willing to provide data that are essential for understanding it. The Department should do it because Airbnb does not want reputational damage and it could say it will not continue the conversation until it gives the data that will allow the Department to make reasonable policy recommendations to Government.

The Department mentioned planning circulars and directions but is it being proactive enough? Mr. Ó Cléirigh said he was preparing another circular but what will happen? He mentioned suggestions and recommendations and said he had issued circulars but it is all very grand to send a circular out. Some may be circulated to members and other may not while some Departments get them while others do not. There has been a long emphasis on circulars but how does the Department actively pursue them? Does it get back to the chief executive after a month or two for a report on the implementation of a circular? The Department knows what the board said in October 2016.

We do not have enough evidence for policy-making. As Deputy Casey said, it seems to be a Dublin problem. Maybe we should specifically look at Dublin. I accept that Mr. Shakespeare is producing a report but we should look at this incrementally and look at Dublin specifically. The witnesses have been very helpful and I thank them.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

I do not have an answer for Senator Murnane O'Connor but I will put the question to my social housing colleagues and get back to her.

If families can put up other families it would solve a lot of crises. It would be good if families could stay in homes until they got a local authority house or found a rented house in the HAP scheme. It is the families in short-term need that are affected. It would be good if we could give an incentive to families for a short-term solution in this emergency.

Mr. Earnán Ó Cléirigh

Deputy Healy-Rae asked about rent pressure zones. One of the other things we are working on is rent predictability measures and we have started a review of the first six months of their operation, as was committed to by the former Minister, Deputy Coveney. A public consultation is under way and it would be good if members of this committee engaged with it, to provide us with information and opinion on the impact of the measures. Specifically, we will ask local authorities to give feedback on whether there have been any impacts from rent pressure zones on the availability of HAP and RAS tenancies.

We did ask Airbnb for data. Entities tend to generate data in response to the requirement to do so. They will do it for their own commercial use and when required to by law. Airbnb might not have all the data for which we are looking. I believe members will have the opportunity to ask representatives of Airbnb itself. Senator Boyhan spoke about circulars. We have to provide guidance to authorities and to work out policy positions and priorities. We have to try to use the instruments we have in terms of regulation and planning in order to implement them. The decisions that need to be taken at a practical level will be taken by local authorities. I take on board the Senator's point about reporting and following up.

Mr. Richard Shakespeare

It is about gathering and getting the right data. We will investigate whether we can get information from the PRTB and the residential property authority to see how things have moved on and what has happened in the sector. We will then cross-reference it with what comes from Airbnb. There is an absence of detailed information so it is difficult to give members any assurances about what is happening.

I thank all witnesses for attending this morning. We have a number of stakeholders still to come in this week and next week. The committee will put together a report of recommendations which we hope will be taken on board. I look forward to further engagement. We will suspend for a couple of minutes to allow our second set of witnesses to take their seats.

Sitting suspended at 11.11 a.m. and resumed at 11.16 a.m.

We will resume in public session. I welcome our second panel of stakeholders from the Simon Community, Mr. Eamonn Tansey, from the Peter McVerry Trust, Mr. Francis Doherty and from Focus Ireland, Mr. Mike Allen and Ms Alison Connolly.

I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that, by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name, or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now call on Mr. Allen to make his opening statement.

Mr. Mike Allen

I thank the committee for inviting us to make this presentation. There are large areas of huge public concern where we have very detailed knowledge from our own experience of exactly what is happening on the ground. This particular problem is not one of them. Our knowledge of Airbnb is secondary. We welcome the opportunity to address the committee. We assume the committee is asking us, as it tries to grapple with this issue, to put it in context. That is where we think we may be able to contribute. We are not able to bring any of our own statistics or figures on it. The research, which I hope is useful, is secondary research we have done on the issue. I do not think the committee needs me to spend time telling it how many individuals and families are homeless. It is the context in which we are working. What Focus Ireland can bring to it is our own research. Every quarter we do a detailed survey of every family that became homeless in a particular month. We phone them up and ask them about not only the immediate cause of their homelessness but their trajectory into homelessness. If we ask families why they became homeless, we end up with a very large number of people who say it was because of family breakdown. If we ask them what happened before that, we find that a very large number were living in the private rented sector. Things went wrong and they went to live with wider family for a period of time and when that broke down they ended up in homeless services. To really understand what is happening, we have to see that these families previously lived in the private rented sector rather than looking at the last place they lived in. Overwhelmingly the families that are in emergency accommodation had their last secure home in the private rented sector.

A small proportion are new family formations but they are the primary ones. Over time we have moved from a situation where the families who became homeless from the private rented sector were saying that rising rents were the cause to saying that it is landlords ceasing to be landlords that is the primary cause.

Somebody's phone is interfering with the sound system. Could people put their phones on airplane mode?

Mr. Mike Allen

I hope it was not me. So to some extent then we are in a situation where in an immediate sense the crisis of homelessness is in the private rented sector. Obviously, I hope it is now well recognised that the fundamental problem is in our failure to deliver affordable and in particular social housing, but the problem is expressing itself in the private rented sector. The question of to what extent housing units which could be privately rented are moving into Airbnb or other platforms for short-term letting is extremely important. We struggle day by day to find places for people to stay. All of our organisations invest substantial funds, including public funds, in buying and owning new property, so if we are leaking property elsewhere it is extremely important.

It is striking then that there is a very little data on this. The absence of data highlights part of the problem. It is not just this area on which we lack data. Every area to do with housing and homelessness, other than the number of individuals who are homeless is highly contested - for example, how many houses were completed; how many houses were started; how many houses are vacant and why they are vacant. The absence of our knowledge about the housing sector says something about the way society has dealt with housing and why we currently have a homelessness problem. Probably the most reliable data one can get is from the Airbnb website, which gives some clear indications about what is available but its is very clear about its limitations as a data source. It always increases one's confidence if a website tells one why one should not believe in information it contains or what its limitations are. It has a figure of 457 full buildings which are described as highly available. If a building is highly available it is probably not being used as a home. At the very least, that is the number of housing units which would otherwise be in the private rented sector if they were not being used for Airbnb. There are also very striking figures on the website about the money one can get from Airbnb as opposed to what one would get in what is already a very inflated private rental market. In particular, if one is not paying tax on it, it shows that it is very attractive to go on Airbnb. Some of those details are outlined in the paper and some of the limitations in the data are also clearly indicated on the website. I will not go into that detail.

Focus Ireland's analysis of the situation is that Airbnb is absolutely not the cause of our homeless crisis. Some of the more extreme commentators have said it is the cause but that is not the case. It is a service that makes a valuable contribution both to tourism in Dublin and elsewhere, and also to household income. We have got to bear that in mind. What we have here is a disruptive form of business entering into an extremely regulated sector. We have had piecemeal regulation and no coherent strategy on regulation in the private rented sector, which is felt to be onerous by landlords and insufficient by tenants. Entering into that is a disruptive new web-based, free market process which is completely unregulated and, inevitably, it will cause enormous difficulties. The response to that is wider than Airbnb but it is a question of how the State struggles with such web-based, regulation-free interactions. Each individual who is letting out his or her place for B&B feels his or her action is entirely justifiable and there are no negative consequences, but when looked at en masse it has very severe significant social impacts.

I believe Airbnb is coming before the committee next week. The fundamental thing is that as a highly profitable enterprise it behaves in a very socially careless way at least. Like all companies that rely on data, it treats the data it gets from private citizens as an asset of its organisation and does not share it with public authorities who need it in order to understand the implications of its behaviour. That is one of the fundamental things the committee needs to challenge. I do not know what can be done under Irish law to get the company to share information that is reliable but one cannot have regulation without data. The only way it appears one can get data other than from such companies is by employing a significant number of inspectors, who operate from the grassroots and try to clarify the situation. One will see examples of that being done in Barcelona and elsewhere.

While Airbnb is not the cause of the problem it is a significant part of the picture in terms of being a contributing factor to making it worse. If we take that minimum figure of about 450 complete housing units, which are more or less completely dedicated for use on Airbnb, it would cost €900 million for the State to provide those 450 housing units. That is a fairly substantial part of the State's investment in social housing. If Focus Ireland and the other organisations here had access to 450 housing units for families we would be looking at enormous savings in terms of hotel costs and it would result in the transformation of the lives of large numbers of families so this is having a very significant impact at the moment. There are things that we need to do now in relation to regulation and control because we are in the middle of a crisis, which may not necessarily be the things one would do in a normally functioning housing market. When we call it a crisis that is the implication of what we are saying. That needs to be looked at.

What is striking about the situation is that some cities are very much gearing up to this problem and are learning lessons about how to regulate the situation. There seems to be no visible sign of cities across the globe who are all facing the same problems sharing experiences, sharing knowledge or networking to create responses. We would very strongly recommend that it is part of what should be done. In the absence of data it is very hard to be more specific than that but we would very strongly recommend that the next stage of the committee's programme should be to try to bring together what data are available, but that needs to be done extremely quickly because this is a problem of the now rather than a long-term think-in about how we deal with the web-based provision of services, which are now being completely deregulated by the Internet.

Sr. Stan of Focus Ireland has regularly spoken about the commodification of housing and how we need to see housing not as a commodity but as part of the fulfilment of a human right to housing. Airbnb and the taking of housing units for which planning permission and probably public subsidy existed to provide them as homes and putting them on the market to be sold off in this way is an absolutely perfect example of the commodification of a scarce resource which is essential to fulfil our human rights.

Mr. Eamonn Tansey

Thank you Chairperson for inviting us here today on behalf of the committee. Our spokesperson, Niamh Randall, sends her apologies for not being able to attend.

The Simon Communities are a network of communities providing local responses to local needs and issues of homelessness all around the country in Cork, Dublin, Dundalk, Galway, the midlands, the mid-west, the north west and the south east. Similar to Mr. Allen, our submission is based on two very important issues at this moment. We wish to deal with the complete lack of affordable housing options in Ireland at the moment, which we believe to be at the core of the housing and homelessness crisis. In that sense our priority must be to deliver new models of affordable housing such as cost rental, which is one financially sustainable social housing model.

This has to be backed up by increasing local authority social housing construction as much as possible.

The second contextual element would be the private rented sector. It is not working for renters, namely rent supplement or HAP recipients. If one looks at the most recent rental report on the website Daft.ie, one will see that rents have increased by 52% nationwide, availability of property is down 82% and this has the impact of creating an ultra competitive and crowded private rental sector. The knock-on effect of this trend on social housing is that it makes the rent supplement and HAP payments increasingly ineffectual. A recent study by the Simon Communities of Ireland has shown that 88% of properties are beyond the reach of people in receipt of these vital housing payments. I did a brief exercise on the data to try to approximate the scale of short-term rentals in Ireland by conducting Airbnb letting searches in key locations around the county. A search of entire place rentals in Cork on Airbnb for this working week shows 51 properties available for two people to rent. The site user, me, is also informed that these 51 properties represent only 17% of total listings in Cork, suggesting that full listings of entire place rentals would equate to approximately 300 properties in that location. Using a similar search in Galway, 185 entire place properties are available representing 27% of total listings in the area, suggesting full availability would equate to 685 properties. A search in Limerick reveals 24 entire place rentals, or 20% of total listings, suggesting there are approximately 121 listings in Limerick. In Dublin where the problem is most acute, a search reveals over 300 properties available to rent, representing 15% of total listings, suggesting total listings in Dublin could equate to approximately 2,000. The main caveat is that I undertook a loose crude exercise but it illustrates the lack of data that is at the core of the problem.

To gauge the impact of short-term lettings on the private rented sector, we could compare availability on Airbnb to the Daft.ie rental report. This would reveal that the 300 entire place properties available to rent on a short-term basis in Cork represents 37.5% of total available long-term lettings in Munster as of 1 May. In Galway there are 13.5% more properties to let on a short-term basis than the total number of properties available to let in Connacht and Ulster combined. In Dublin, the 2,000 entire place properties available to rent on a short-term basis on Airbnb are approximately equal to twice the total number of available properties available for long-term letting in Dublin. As Mr. Allen alluded to, if these short-term lettings were released into the private rented sector, one could argue that it would reduce the over-competitive nature of the sector and possibly slow down increasing rents. The impact on the wider housing sector is less simple to gauge. One potential impact of short-term lettings on the cost of housing was demonstrated in the planning case taken by the Temple Bar residents' group against an Airbnb host operating a short-term let with annual rental earnings of nearly €80,000. The property came to the attention of the group when it was listed for sale at a price of €425,000, which the Temple Bar residents maintained was above the local average of similar properties of about €275,000. The inflated asking price was said to reflect the revenue stream generated by ongoing short-term letting through Airbnb. One could suggest that successful short-term letting properties like this could drive up local house prices on the basis of profitable revenue streams.

One solution to the problem would be to explore different regulatory measures to lessen the negative impact of short-term lettings on the housing and rental market. A number of European capitals have introduced new regulations combined with increased enforcement in an attempt to curb the impact of short-term lettings on the housing and rental markets. Examples include Berlin, Germany, Amsterdam in the Netherlands, cities across France and, more recently, increased enforcement procedures in Barcelona.

In this context we must protect people who are currently living in the private rented sector. To do so, we must fast track existing commitments to introduce indefinite leasing, giving people a long lease only dependent on their conformity with the lease agreement. We continue to see an urgent need to introduce rent certainty with rents linked to the consumer price index.

We need to boost the affordable housing supply. The Simon Communities of Ireland believe that one of the primary solutions to the housing and homeless crisis lies in strategic State investment in affordable housing for low and middle income families. The commitment to develop a cost rental model for the rental sector is encouraging and NESC and the Nevin Economic Research Institute have done great work in this regard. Tax incentives for cost rental providers must be considered to ensure their viability. The proposed use of local authority owned land to deliver rental units targeting middle income families is welcome but must be balanced by securing significant conditions from investors in terms of security of tenure, rent certainty, quality, safety and fire standards and developer contributions similar to the existing Part V contributions for social housing. Ultimately, local authorities must be fully resourced to re-engage in large scale social housing construction, given that current completion rates are disappointingly low at 665 units built in 2016.

In conclusion, we need to increase availability and access to affordable housing for low and middle income families. In the private rented sector it is crucial that we increase security of tenure and rent certainty for all those living there and to reduce the knock-on effects on people in receipt of State housing benefits.

Mr. Francis Doherty

I thank the Chairperson and members for the invitation extended to the Peter McVerry Trust to attend today. Much of the commentary on short-term lettings just focuses on the letting platform Airbnb. What we would like to stress is that this is simply the largest concentration of short-term lettings online. There are many other businesses and individuals operating in the market who do not use the platform. The rise in the number of short-term lettings in such an unregulated manner is another symptom of a highly dysfunctional housing system. While short-term lettings do not have a major impact on the housing system as a whole, at present they can in specific small or local area systems have deeply negative and disruptive impacts. The rise can also disproportionately impact on specific groups within the housing system, such as people reliant on private rented units for their accommodation. It is also of concern that the use of short-term letting is growing in popularity as it does have the potential clearly to grow to such a point that the broader housing system is more deeply impacted. The manner in which short-term letting has grown also points to deeper problems with our planning system and particular shortcomings in how we monitor and enforce planning legislation.

In assessing the impact of short-term letting, the Peter McVerry Trust has framed this presentation around three critical issues - these are entire properties to rent; businesses or individuals engaged in multi-unit lettings; and non-compliance with planning regulations. With respect to the negative impact on the availability of rental properties, the primary issue of concern to the Peter McVerry Trust is that the rapid rise in short-term lettings has caused a further decline in the number of properties to rent under a normal medium-term lease. This is critical because the private rental market remains the main access route for people leaving homelessness, particularly for single adults, who would otherwise face very long waits for social housing opportunities. The growth in short-term lettings has undoubtedly led to traditional rental properties transitioning to the short-term lettings market. This reduces overall supply. It impacts on the Peter McVerry Trust's ability to move people out of homelessness and of course, most important, negatively impacts on people in homelessness. At any point in time, the rapid rise in the number of properties lost to short-term letting is concerning, given that supplies have been disrupted and reduced. It is of particular concern at the current time when the availability of rented properties in Dublin and other high needs areas is at a historically low level. The Peter McVerry Trust is concerned that existing rental properties are being transitioned to short-term lettings. This means a tenant being evicted and displaced. At present sitting tenants are being evicted by property owners in order to facilitate a shift from medium-term to short-term letting. We do not have any record of specific instances and it is perfectly feasible that some tenants have ended up in homeless services as a result of property moving to the short-term lettings market. For the property owner, higher yields secured through a short-term lease model and a commercial environment devoid of any genuine regulation make sense.

Short-term letting also has the potential to impact on new supply. It is likely to reduce the number of new properties to rent in the future and to also impact on the ability of potential home owners to buy homes. This arises because of a significant growth in the number of businesses and individuals engaged in large-scale commercial multi-unit lettings. In 2016, there was a significant increase in the number of multi-unit users of the Airbnb platform. Given the absence of regulation and the high yields available, many investors are now acquiring properties on the market to add to their short-term lettings portfolios. This means those same properties cannot be used as traditional rental properties or cannot be bought by home buyers or owner-occupiers.

We have tried to focus on one area to give an example of how short-term letting can impact on housing in an area. In this regard, we have taken Dublin 1, where the Peter McVerry Trust is based and has historical links. Currently, there are more short-term rental properties available in the Dublin 1 area than there are traditional rental units. In other words, there are approximately 40 traditional rental properties and in the region of 300 short-term lets available. As this is in an area in which there are significant levels of overcrowding in existing rental properties, acute levels of social housing need and almost a complete absence of affordable housing options, the impacts are clear. While a significant number of those short-term listings are found on Airbnb, the majority are not listed on that platform. One relatively new actor in the short-term lettings market in this area has converted a number of residential properties to commercial short-term lettings, without any record of planning approval. The Peter McVerry Trust estimates that within the immediate environs of Mountjoy Square, Dublin 1, at least 30 former rental units have been lost in the past 18 months as a result of illegal change of use for the purposes of short-term lets. The trust is aware that this is reflected across other residential buildings in other parts of Dublin 1 and Dublin 7. Some of these instances have been highlighted by us and others in the media this year.

We would like to place on record our recognition that for some owners the use of short-term letting is a means to afford their housing. This can be due to the need to address a legacy from the housing boom and financial crash, with many property owners stuck with devalued assets and crippling mortgages. Equally, many people are facing very real challenges in holding on to their accommodation and the use of short-term lettings may offer them the chance to retain their homes. The Peter McVerry Trust would hope that the committee would recognise these sensitivities when considering how best these individuals and home owners can be supported to comply with planning, health and safety and tax issues. It is almost a separate body of work to tackle the actions of commercial businesses and individuals operating full-time lettings of entire properties, which is a smaller but rapidly growing segment of the short-term lettings market.

As regards recommendations, previous speakers have pointed to the lack of data. Evidence is needed to boost our understanding and to formulate policy. On planning enforcement, the Peter McVerry Trust believes that at the very least a proactive response from local authorities is needed to ensure full planning compliance regarding properties used for short-term leases. This may require a cultural shift because, as one local authority official stated, enforcement would, as a first, action-oriented step, lead to an immediate reduction in the use of illegal short-term lettings. We would also urge consideration of a term defined ban on residential to commercial change-of-use applications in respect of short-term lettings in light of the current housing crisis. This measure, when combined with an enforcement approach, would push the owners of properties who let them, in their entirety and on a full-time basis, to put them back into the housing system, thereby increasing the number of properties to rent or buy.

The committee should examine the need to review and, if necessary, amend the Planning and Development Act to ensure the imposition of adequate financial penalties on those found to be in breach of planning legislation. International evidence, particularly from the US, with respect to Airbnb hosts shows that this is the most effective deterrent to prevent illegal listings. It is important that we try to address the problem rather that the publicity. We would have serious reservations about a memorandum of understanding with Airbnb. We believe that legislation and enforcement of existing legislation is the best course of action.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I am not sure if they were following the earlier session when members expressed frustration about the lack of hard data, particularly in terms of how short-term letting is affecting Dublin city. What most of us were urging is the need for regulation of this sector to ensure that it does not have the type of negative impacts just outlined.

The recommendations outlined by Mr. Doherty at the end of his contribution are particularly helpful and I will be urging the committee to take them into account when it comes to producing its report. I have two questions for the witnesses, the first of which relates to enforcement. In his submission, Mr. Doherty mentioned two potential areas of enforcement. Has the Peter McVerry Trust made planning enforcement complaints to Dublin City Council? We heard earlier from the council officials that they are only responding to complaints made rather than proactively looking at issues. If the Trust has not already made complaints, I urge it to do so or to provide us with the information so that we can do so. We would be keen to do that.

I am particularly interested in the recommendation relating to planning around change-of-use applications, which we are examining in the context of the vacant homes issue. Am I correct in stating that what the trust is recommending is a ban on change of use from commercial to residential for the purposes of short-term lets? Perhaps Mr. Doherty would elaborate.

Mr. Francis Doherty

By way of clarification, it would be-----

Unless Deputy Ó Broin has more questions, before Mr. Doherty responds, I will take questions from other members.

I do not have any questions for the witnesses. I would like, however, to thank them for and acknowledge their efforts in terms of the preparation of the report provided today, which reaffirms our beliefs in respect of this sector. While short-term letting might not be the main contributory factor in the homelessness crisis, it is not helping and is making a critical situation worse.

We met Department officials at our earlier sessions. It would appear that very little has been done since the decision by An Bord Pleanála issued. A working group was established but it has only met once. It met for the first time last week and while it has issued circulars to the local authorities urging planning enforcement officers to be vigilant in respect of this sector and how it is policed, there is no direction to them to actively seek to address issues within local authority areas in terms of this activity. Neither this committee nor the Peter McVerry Trust should be the policing authority but it would appear that the practice is that the local authorities will only act on foot of complaints made to them, which is far from what they are supposed to be doing, as far as I am concerned. They are supposed to enforce the law of the land. There is legislation in place in that regard. The matter has been adjudicated by the relevant authority, namely, An Bord Pleanála, and the local authorities need to act accordingly. It would appear, without them admitting so, that they do not have the personnel or manpower to do a trawl and match the effort made in other cities throughout Europe. We have said in no uncertain terms to the Department that it has failed in its responsibilities heretofore. We expect a sea change in this regard as soon as is practicably possible. There is an urgency required in the context of the response to this crisis which has not been forthcoming from the Department. This is an example of another matter in respect of which the right procedures and processes are not being adhered to. We will seek to hold the Department and the Minister with responsibility for it to account. The Peter McVerry Trust can be assured of our assistance in ensuring that is the case.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. Many of today's witnesses mentioned that there is anecdotal evidence that short-term letting is impacting on the housing crisis but there is no hard evidence in that regard. We have an idea of the number of properties in question but no statistics. There are a lot of issues arising in terms of legislation. Mr. Doherty mentioned that legislation, as opposed to other measures, is required. A register of short-term lettings is important. That issue needs to be addressed.

I know that the witnesses are aware of the decision of An Bord Pleanála in regard to the short-term letting of apartments, which is not permitted, and of houses, which is permitted. Also, in the context of houses built in recent years, owners wishing to let them in the short term or otherwise are required to obtain permission to do so. At our earlier session, we heard from one of the groups that the requirements in respect of these properties, as set out in the decision of An Bord Pleanála, have not been conveyed to Airbnb and other similar operations, which is disappointing.

They do not seem to have gone to them to say that these different requirements have to be met with regard to these properties. For example, they have to be registered for VAT and as employers. People do not seem to have been told there are planning issues that need to be addressed and that they need to ensure the properties they are getting are covered properly. This does not seem to have been done.

Obviously, the working group will come back with many recommendations. I am sure many of the issues we have been discussing will arise in that context. I am worried about the use of student accommodation for short-term lettings. This needs to be looked at carefully. I do not know whether the witnesses have an opinion on that. There are other examples of properties that might also be utilised in this way.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I was at another committee meeting when they made them. The issue of short-term lettings has been raised in the Dáil on many occasions by various people. While companies such as Airbnb are having an obvious impact, I think they are becoming a convenient scapegoat to be thrown up as a reason for the housing shortage. We do not have Airbnb in Blanchardstown as far as I am aware because it is not a popular tourist destination. I would not say too many people in Deputy Ellis's local area-----

It is mainly in the city centre.

It is not purely a city centre issue because it affects other areas of desirability. I am not minimising it. I get irritated because I think it is raised as an issue far too frequently. I think that, in general, the use of accommodation to make money in life is awful. I would be in a minority in this Dáil in that regard. Most Deputies are in favour of such activity. I would not be in favour Airbnb at all. I think we should move on because there is really nothing to see here. Key areas of homelessness have been identified in Dublin based on the addresses of people who are staying in emergency accommodation. I am sure the witnesses from Focus Ireland and the other groups will know that these people tend to come from particular areas. There seems to be a huge problem in north-west Dublin. It is not about Airbnb; it is about a lack of affordable public housing. A year on from the special Committee on Housing and Homelessness, which many of us spent time on, nothing has changed. The situation has got worse in the sense that more people are now registered as homeless. I think this is an ideological question. A complete and utter change of policy is needed. We should bring the new Minister before this committee.

He will be here tomorrow.

I am sorry; the Chairman probably said that earlier. I do not mean to suggest he will not be here. We will have to raise this issue with him because it is clear that the current approach is not working.

I thank the witnesses. I have read the three submissions. I had to go to the Seanad to raise an item on the Order of Business but I am back. I took the time to read all the submissions. They are excellent and concise. As Deputy Coppinger said, this is a simple enough issue. It needs to be seen in the context of social housing policy and the delivery of affordable and social housing. We do not have a national affordable rent scheme. I think we need to look at this matter in that bigger context. I think the reports are excellent. I hope some of the recommendations will be fed into this process because they are important. I note that the submission made by the Peter McVerry Trust argues that the growth in short-term lettings is having an impact on the trust's "ability to move people out of homelessness". This is a simple but profound statement. Clearly, we need to address this real issue.

Everyone who has spoken here today referred to the need for quality standards and compliance with regulations. That needs to be done. I agree with Deputy Cowen that there did not seem to be any sense of urgency on the part of the officials from Dublin City Council or the Department in this regard. We heard the usual stuff about being notified of the board's decision in October as part of the section 5 declaration that was made in respect of Temple Bar. The standard old circulars are coming in like confetti into local authorities. They sit on some shelf or in some folder and nothing happens. I think Deputy Cowen is right. It is disappointing that a proactive approach has not been taken. If an issue is raised with an authority, it is obliged to do something about it. It is simply not good enough to send a circular to the Department. These bodies need to be on the Department's case, month in and month out, in order to ascertain what is happening. That is where matters stand.

The lack of an evidence base is clear in all of this. Two of the groups mentioned in their submissions that there is a need for greater research and greater clarity on all the points. Everyone - policymakers, stakeholders, users and people who avail of rented accommodation - needs to work on the basis of evidence so that alternative solutions can be found. If there was more accommodation in the market, this really would not be an issue. I am an advocate of Airbnb. There are great benefits of having Airbnb in cities. We have an acute housing and accommodation problem. There are other problems associated with that. I congratulate the witnesses again. I know many of them have been here before. Their submissions were concise, which is really impressive. These committees tend to attract endless papers, but these submissions are concise. I think these strong recommendations should go forward as part of the general policy in this area.

I compliment the witnesses on the report, which I have read. The main issue is lack of supply of housing. I think this problem will get worse until the Government sorts that issue out. Last year, the then Minister, Deputy Coveney, said there was a lack of clarity around the role of Airbnb. That is the problem. I firmly believe there is a lack of enforcement, a lack of legislation and a lack of leadership. I suggest that all local authorities should be given proper leadership on the role they need to play. It will go down to that. Everything in local authority housing goes through all the local authorities. The Department needs to put more emphasis on building houses. It is not happening at the moment. We are being given all these promises. I hope they are fulfilled. This is a very good report. It is sad that so many people are homeless in 2017. We really need to address the major issues they are facing. I commend the witnesses again.

Are there any new or innovative ideas that short-term letting or home-sharing could offer to the charities involved in this area, including those represented at today's meeting? I accept that Airbnb has not caused the housing and homelessness crisis with which we are dealing. Obviously, supply and affordability are massive factors. This committee will discuss the quarterly report relating to Rebuilding Ireland tomorrow. We are aware that local authorities are being tasked with coming up with State-owned land in their respective areas where affordable and social housing can be developed. Senator Boyhan will be familiar with a site in our area of Dún Laoghaire where there is the potential to return almost 500 units. It is up to local authorities to decide whether the units that are developed should be private, affordable, rent-to-buy, build-to-rent or social. They are tasked with making those decisions. We know that local authorities own over 600 sites throughout the country with the potential to return 10,000 units. While we are waiting on that supply, we have problems in other areas as well. I wonder whether the witnesses can see any innovative ideas or alternatives in the short-term lettings area. I invite all the witnesses to respond to the various points that have been made.

Mr. Francis Doherty

Deputy Ó Broin asked whether we have lodged any complaints. We have not done so. We do many things, and planning enforcement is probably the least of our priorities at the moment. We can certainly share the information we are aware of with Dublin City Council. We have made it available. It has been shared on platforms like "Morning Ireland" and Dublin InQuirer.

I would like to clarify the point that was made about proposing a ban on change of use. That relates specifically to short-term lettings that are currently let but do not have planning permission. Where should the owners of such properties go to seek planning permission, given the current crisis?

Our priority should be housing and homes for people, be they homeless or seeking rental accommodation, over the needs of the tourism industry.

Several members have raised the question of urgency. Everyone on this side of the table would agree that we need to see greater urgency in the system. Front-line staff in the Peter McVerry Trust and Focus Ireland try day in and day out to do their best in a growing and deepening crisis. We need the effort and urgency that we display to be replicated at political level in the Department and the local authorities.

Deputy Coppinger mentioned that Airbnb does not impact on particular areas in north-west Dublin. There is, however, a ripple effect for people who cannot get accommodation in the city because apartments are being changed to short-term lettings. These people then move to outlying areas which pushes up prices and affects those at the lower end of the market.

I often say that if the housing system above us in the homeless sector is broken, it makes our task of ending homelessness almost impossible. If we cannot get access to housing in the first instance, we cannot move people out of homelessness and, therefore, we stay with the shelter system which grows in scale and the problem deepens.

Mr. Eamonn Tansey

In response to the comment about innovative ideas, that would not arise in the context of short-term lettings but in the wider roll-out of Housing First for chronically entrenched homeless people. That is a commitment in the Rebuilding Ireland action plan and is being brilliantly rolled out by Focus Ireland and the Peter McVerry Trust. We need the housing units to deliver this. Local authority sites should be used to develop and build a certain allocation of homes to house people under Housing First, which is housing without preconditions and with all the wraparound supports a person will need. We increasingly see a need for a youth Housing First-style programme too. The delivery of Housing First units is vitally important for that to be correctly implemented.

Mr. Mike Allen

Our discussion has concentrated almost entirely on Dublin. To broaden it a bit, from family connections in Leitrim, which has the lowest rents in Ireland and supposedly the largest amount of empty property, I know that it is virtually impossible for people to rent privately in the area because virtually everything that is available is in Airbnb. While it is not necessarily leading to homelessness it is leading to housing precariousness for couples in those circumstances. It is not just a question of homelessness but the overall impact on the private rental market.

We regularly get proposals for innovative ideas. Focus Ireland and the Dublin Regional Homeless Executive are regularly confronted late at night with the problem of helping families when there is no emergency accommodation and no hotels are available. Contingency beds are made available in hotels that are partly under construction, which is less than ideal and which leads to problems. There is some very serious misinformation from some quarters about what is going on there. It is certainly problematic. People propose from time to time that we use Airbnb for this sort of situation. That would be a further wrong step in our response to the crisis because that is short-term accommodation and is not part of any medium to long-term solution. That is one innovative solution I mention and denounce at the same time. In the United States, where Airbnb is coming under criticism, it is offering to house refugees. We need to distinguish public relations exercises from the substantive issue.

It is absolutely crucial to distinguish between the problems arising because we do not have good enough legislation because things have changed, and the problems arising because we have not bothered to implement the legislation and regulations that we have in place. Most of the examples we are giving are of non-implementation of regulations. There is increasing and welcome regulation of the private rented sector and taxation of landlords, which is all great. However, if there is another area where places can be rented out, ignore planning legislation and not pay tax, of course there is a problem. While it is the responsibility of local authorities to implement regulations, it is the responsibility of the Houses of the Oireachtas to be much stronger in demanding that. One issue to consider is how the policing of it is funded and how much of the savings that would be made by implementing the regulations would actually go to the local authorities and, therefore, create a funding source for them to be able to do this, as opposed to what happens now whereby people do not tend to regulate systems where there is no benefit to them from the regulation. As a result, the benefit goes into somebody else's pocket. That might be considered to get this working. To be tied up in long discussions about new legislation when we cannot be bothered to implement existing planning or tax legislation would be time misspent.

I thank the witnesses for attending and for their ongoing engagement with the committee. I am sure it will not be long before they are here again. We will compile a report based on all the evidence provided and submit it to the Department in the hope that it will take on board our recommendations.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.05 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Thursday, 22 June 2017.
Top
Share