I thank the joint committee for inviting us to appear before it today. I will speak specifically about the housing dimension of homelessness. As the Chairman pointed out, there are many causes which lead people to experience homelessness. Every solution always involves a house or home. Houses are absolutely essential to any solution to homelessness but are not sufficient in themselves. The supports which a person, family or household gets following settlement into a new home are crucial for sustaining that.
Historically, homeless persons are seen as objects of charity or as suffering from a condition which would be hard to change. Our job is to manage homelessness and to make it less of a problem for those who experience it. During the past decade or so, there has been strong growth in the view that homelessness, in particular long-term homelessness which is homelessness for longer than six months, can and should be ended. Ireland has led the way in this type of thinking. All political parties, Independents and voluntary organisations have shifted to that view of homelessness, which has led to the type of language used in the programme for Government, for example, housing first or increasingly housing-led policies. In providing a home and supports for a person long-term homelessness can be ended. That applies right across the board and not only in respect of people who are housing ready. Obviously, this puts much pressure on in regard to the types of supports to be provided. However, all discussion of supports is irrelevant if there are not houses available in the first instance.
In Dublin and, increasingly across the country, there has been a reconfiguration of homeless services, away from managing homelessness and the commitment to end long-term homelessness by 2010. As such, people will experience homelessness for a much shorter period and our energies will then be on prevention and in supporting people in homes. That was not achieved. However, reconfiguration has occurred. It is important to recognise that there has been a change in services. That view of homelessness is not alone better for the individual because it reflects the deep human need for a home but it is also cheaper. It is important to emphasise these days that emergency accommodation, in particular private emergency accommodation in which many people in Dublin live, is an expensive way of addressing this problem. Getting people into homes is cheaper and better for the individual.
The crisis in delivery of social housing, which is the result of the economic crisis in the State, presents a major challenge to moving forward on the homeless strategy. Members from Dublin constituencies will be aware of the 2010 target to find 1,200 new homes for homeless people in Dublin. Members may also be aware of that as it received much publicity. The slide I am now showing indicates from where that figure came. The most recent Counted In survey shows that 2,144 households were homeless in 2006, in respect of whom there were some allocations from the four local authorities in 2008 and 2009. There were also just over 400 households living in accommodation with the wrong type of lease and, as such, they were homeless. When those leases were changed, they were okay. The original target of 1,200 was to be achieved in 2008 and 2009. However, it was not achieved in the first two years and was then set as the target for 2010. We have failed to achieve this and to end long-term homelessness, thus putting the strategy for tackling homeless in crisis.
The next slide shows some of the background to what I mean by a crisis in the delivery of social housing. Members will note that over that period - excluding RAS figures which are legitimately called social housing but are less relevant for moving people out of homelessness - there was a huge decline in the number of social houses provided. The last figure shows that if nationally 3,360 social houses were provided in 2010, the aspiration was that one-third of social houses provided in the entire State should be provided to the homeless in Dublin, which gives an indication of the challenge that existed and continues to face us. There is no reason to believe that the number of households which are homeless is significantly smaller now than it was in 2008. Therefore, if we want to move the large number of long-term homeless people into housing we need to have a supply of social housing in the broadest sense. This means we need to boost social housing provision beyond what it is at present. As the committee is aware, this is a major challenge because of the limitations on local authorities and the capacity of voluntary housing associations to rise to the challenge. We also need to ensure a significant proportion of what becomes available goes to people moving out of homelessness. This is a significant political challenge for all public representatives, as other people on the list would find themselves waiting longer than they otherwise would. If this challenge is not faced those most in need will be consigned to living in emergency accommodation for a long time at great expense.
The housing support system available in Dublin, the support to live independent scheme, SLI, needs to be made available nationwide. Local authorities, voluntary housing bodies and private landlords are uncomfortable accepting people moving out of homelessness unless they know support is there. Support makes a difference and should be available nationwide.
Many challenges face us but the consequence of not rising to these challenges and having a coherent strategy to provide exit routes from homelessness will be a return to periodic crises in homelessness every time the weather gets cold. As has happened in the past, the front pages of the newspapers will have stories about people dying on the streets. This would have a massive financial cost as well as the cost of people's lives. With regard to social housing, part of the picture must be a contribution from the private rental sector. My colleague, Mr. Bob Jordan, will address this aspect.