Skip to main content
Normal View

Committee on Budgetary Oversight debate -
Wednesday, 22 Mar 2023

Stability Programme Update: Discussion

As we started late today due to the voting block in the Chamber, I ask for members' agreement to defer the private business until next week. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I welcome Dr. Conor O'Toole, Dr. Kieran McQuinn and Ms Wendy Disch from the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI.

Before we begin, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

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 Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place in which Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, to participate in public meetings. I will not permit members to participate where they do not adhere to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

I invite Dr. McQuinn to make an opening statement.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

I thank the Chair for the invitation to the ESRI to appear before the committee. My colleagues and I are grateful for the opportunity to appear before it to provide our views on the current economic and fiscal situation and to discuss some key issues and risks that the medium-term fiscal strategy should consider.

The pace of growth across most western economies in the first quarter of 2023 has been stronger than many had expected.

Better-than-anticipated economic activity and a modest decline in inflationary pressures has abated fears about an international recession that had emerged towards the end of 2022.

Given these developments, we have revised upwards several indicators from our winter outlook. International trade is expected to continue to grow robustly through 2023, while high savings levels and a slowdown in inflation are likely to contribute to higher than anticipated consumption activity this year. Modified investment, which had grown very strongly throughout 2022, is expected to grow at a slower pace in 2023. It will, however, also contribute to growth in the present year. Additionally, improvements in the labour market have continued into the first few months of 2023, with historically low rates of unemployment. Given these combining factors, we now believe modified domestic demand, MDD, will grow more strongly in 2023 than we anticipated at the end of 2022.

Some of the main reasons for the better-than-expected outlook have been the easing of energy prices experienced across western economies to date in 2023 and the improvements in supply bottlenecks. However, the overall international outlook for inflation in 2023 is still somewhat uncertain. While energy related pressures are clearly abating, there is growing evidence of second round effects, with estimates of core inflation and food prices still remaining quite high. The presence of second round effects may have implications for the proposed response of monetary authorities to the inflation issue. Nonetheless, inflation rates both from an international and domestic perspective are set to be notably lower in 2023 than had been expected at the end of 2022.

A crucial issue for the Irish domestic economy over the next 12 to 18 months is the extent to which domestic sources of inflation may well intensify as the economy continues to grow in a robust manner and replace energy-related pressures as the main driver of inflation. In particular, the historically low levels of unemployment are likely to contribute to an acceleration in earnings growth which may further add to domestic inflationary pressures. We also believe that the domestic macroeconomic outlook is quite favourable for 2024. This is particularly the case if inflationary pressures continue to abate next year and monetary authorities begin to ease off on policy rate tightening which has occurred through 2022 and into 2023.

I turn now to concentration risks, overheating and the housing market. From a macroeconomic perspective, as the Irish economy emerges relatively unscathed from recent challenges, such as Covid-19 and inflationary pressures, there is a significant risk that the country may face overheating challenges, particularly in the face of a historically tight labour market.

In that regard the proposal by the Commission for Taxation for a site value tax, SVT, is of particular note. The general case for such a tax has been made in the 2021 work of Kumhof et al. They argue that tax reform in general should shift taxes away from productive labour and capital, where they reduce incentives to work and save, and onto land, where they do not distort any such incentives. In an international context, such a policy, as argued in the 2021 work of Kumhof et al and that of Wolf this year, would provide sustainable Government revenue over the medium term while not adversely impacting overall economic activity.

In such a context, increasing taxation levels in the domestic economy is a viable policy option to temper inflationary pressures. From a competitiveness perspective, any such increases in taxation should be on unproductive forms of economic activity, such as land, and not on labour or capital. Therefore, we believe that the adoption of an SVT could be a useful mechanism in helping to control overheating pressures which the economy may experience over the medium term. It would target an unproductive asset, such as land, while not impacting either labour or capital in the economy.

Much of the growth in the domestic economy in recent times has been due to the performance of key multinational sectors. In particular, the pharmaceutical and ICT sectors have seen significant increases in both value added and employment over the past three years. As noted in successive commentaries, the exceptional performance of these sectors does leave the domestic economy vulnerable to a significant correction or decline in either sector. This concentration risk is particularly evident in terms of corporation tax receipts, and we will discuss this issue more in the public finances section.

One area where the domestic economy is likely to face continued pressure over the medium term is in the housing market. The impact of high housing costs in an Irish context has been documented in the 2019 work of Corrigan et al. Housing supply levels reached a 15-year high in 2022 of 29,000 units. While the number of units supplied in 2023 is likely to be less than this owing to the reduced number of commencements in 2022, the underlying trend is an upward one as far as completions is concerned. In light of new population estimates which will be available later this year, however, it is now likely that the structural demand for housing is likely to be revised upwards somewhat. This means the demand for housing is likely to exceed the supply over the medium term. As a result, house price inflation, along with increases in rents, is likely to continue, albeit in the case of house prices, at a slower pace than was the case in 2022.

The Government has committed to increase the funding available for housing construction generally; something necessary owing to the funding gap in the housing market identified, for example, in the 2016 work of Duffy et al. It is important, however, that every effort is still made to reduce the cost of building a house and avoid adding to inflationary pressures in the housing market.

Moving to the public finances. Alongside the better-than-anticipated growth outlook for this year, we also anticipate further improvements in the public finances. We have revised upwards our expectation for the public finances in 2023, with a significant surplus expected in the general government balance and a further reduction in debt to GDP. This surplus is inclusive of the expectation that funds continue to be set aside for the National Reserve Fund, NRF, which was established in budget 2023. While strong growth is anticipated across several tax headings, the growing vulnerability of the public finances to concentration risks is particularly apparent, as the ICT and pharma-related sectors continue to account for the majority of corporation tax receipts.

We welcome the establishment of the NRF, but there are several issues concerning its implementation and operation, which we believe should be outlined. For example, there should be greater clarity concerning the calculation of tax receipts the Government deems windfall in nature. Equally, the amount of taxation revenues being diverted to the fund are substantial in nature. Also, some clarity is required in terms of potential uses of the fund in areas such as pensions, climate change, housing and health. Related to this, it should also be established how the fund can operate in conjunction with any changes that are proposed to the European Union fiscal rules.

We thank the committee again for the opportunity to discuss our assessment of the macroeconomic and fiscal situation. We look forward to answering any comments and questions members may have.

I thank Dr. McQuinn for that comprehensive opening contribution. I will now open the meeting to our members, following our usual rota. I call Deputy Doherty.

I thank Dr. McQuinn and welcome him to the committee. I am sorry for the delay. We have just come back from the voting block in the Dáil, where the Government has unfortunately voted to not extend the eviction ban.

I will focus on some of the housing issues raised in Dr. McQuinn's contribution. He mentioned that "in light of...population estimates...it is now likely that the structural demand for housing [will] be revised upwards, with demand exceeding supply in the medium term". Dr. McQuinn stated that "as a result, house price inflation, along with increases in rents, is likely to continue". What is the ESRI's estimation of the housing supply and demand mismatch? What is that thought to be currently? Given the targets we see in Housing for All, how does the ESRI project that shortfall to increase? What is the medium-term expectation referred to in the context of continuing house price inflation and increases in rents?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

I thank the Deputy. In 2023, we believe that housing supply will probably be somewhere in the region of 26,000 to 28,000 units. We have not finalised our figures yet. We have a quarterly economic commentary coming out next week which will contain our finalised numbers. The total, however, is obviously in this region. As I said in the statement, this is heavily based on what happened with the construction commencements last year. There was a slowing down in this regard in 2022, compared with what we saw in 2021. This is a strong indicator of activity in respect of completions in the following year.

Regarding the structural demand estimates, and where we see them, those that exist currently were estimated by our colleagues. Depending on the assumptions adopted in this regard, the figure is somewhere in the region of 30,000 to 35,000 units annually. The work will be updated in the third quarter of this year, so it is hard to put a figure on this number now, but it is almost certainly going to be larger than that, given the way the population estimates are likely to go. In terms of where we see supply going over the medium term, if we look at the supply picture, certainly from 2017 and 2018 onwards, it is notable that there has been a pick-up in this regard and the underlying trend is certainly an upward one. What happened during the pandemic is that we had these oscillations up and down due to public health measures.

There were supply side shortages and there was uncertainty in the last year concerning inflation. Key elements of cost-price inflation in the housing sector have been particularly hit. That has distorted the picture. This year we expect supply levels to be in the region of 26,000 to 28,000 units. Next year we expect, based on the trends, supply to be in excess of 30,000 units. The imbalance depends on what the estimate of structural demand is likely to be. It will probably be 35,000 to 40,000 units, or possibly even higher. There will be a continuing imbalance in the next two to three years at least.

On the implications for house price inflation, we did some work last year where we estimated there had been over-valuation in the market, mainly because of the large build-up of savings in the economy following the pandemic, which tended to impact the demand side of the market sharply. On the supply side, there were distortions due to the pandemic. There was a slowdown in construction activity and inflationary issues. That caused house prices to jump last year, when there was a sharp increase. This year that will moderate and there is already evidence of that, but as long as the imbalance exists between supply and demand, there will be upward pressure and underlying pressure on prices. It is hard to see prices falling any time soon, even if the rate of growth is easing considerably.

The law normally is that the sharp increase in interest rates, meaning the cost of a mortgage unless you are a cash buyer has gone up dramatically, should in a normal environment push down house prices. However, in Dr. McQuinn’s assessment that will not happen in the next two to three years because of the mismatch in supply and demand. While prices will not increase at the level seen in the past, they will still increase in that period. Is that his assessment?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

I was coming on to the interest rate issue, which is hugely important. It affects demand almost instantaneously. We have already seen it with the pick-up in the variable rate. That immediately impacts housing demand because it immediately impacts a large number of potential house buyers. It impacts the amount they can borrow, which has a direct relationship with house prices. There are a lot of moving parts in this but over the next 12 months we expect house prices to grow, though at a much reduced pace. Beyond that, it will depend on the inflationary outlook and whether monetary authorities continue to tighten policy towards the end of the year.

Interest rates could move back down.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Exactly.

Dr. McQuinn said it is important every effort is made to reduce the cost of building. What policy options should be considered?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

We have spent much time thinking about this over the years. There are many elements of house building over which the Government does not have a huge amount of control. Certain inputs are by and large determined by international prices. We are already seeing evidence of that in the way the energy crisis has impacted housing elements. One area where the Government can impact and to which attention needs to be devoted is the treatment of land. We talked about the site value tax and the potential for it to be merged. The Commission on Taxation is looking at the extent to which it can be merged with the new residential zoned tax. It is important we continue to stimulate the supply of land in that way. Taking a more long-term perspective on this, an interesting report was done by TASC last summer which addressed the land market quite comprehensively.

We need to think about it seriously because many State agents are back in the house-building game, which we all welcome. However, between the approved housing bodies, local authorities which are coming back into the game and the Land Development Agency, we need to be careful we do not have different agents collectively pushing up the demand for land. There is also a private market for land. How we use, regulate and provide land is an important issue and an area where Government can have an impact on reducing the cost, ultimately. It is over a longer term and will not happen today or tomorrow.

We spoke of house prices and rent. Dr. McQuinn expects them to go up in the medium term. Homelessness is another factor in the housing crisis. The Government has, with the support of some Independents, voted to lift the ban. There were 3,000 eviction notices in quarter 3 of last year, many of them falling due on 1 April, in eight days’ time. Has the ESRI done any assessment of homelessness? Does it see homelessness following house prices and rents? Will it rise in the coming period? What is the ESRI’s assessment of where it is going?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

We have not explicitly measured or forecast homelessness. I do not think other colleagues have estimated or forecast levels of homelessness but some have looked at homelessness in terms of the housing market and policies. We do not forecast it but as long as rents continue to increase and that imbalance exists, there will be continued pressures as far as homelessness is concerned. We do not formally estimate or model it but it is symptomatic of the pressures on the housing market.

Did the ESRI look at the eviction ban or at what is happening in Scotland, where it was extended?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

No. We have not formally looked at the eviction issue. We have not been asked to do it. We do much work for the rental tenancy board in terms of looking at rent and rent levels. We looked at the rent pressure zones and the impact they had on rental inflation.

Okay. Dr. McQuinn says the ESRI does not expect the level of inflation predicted last year. Inflation dropped in January and went back up in February. Where does the ESRI see inflation at? If it moderates, it does not mean prices are coming down. Prices are locked in at the levels they are at and are still increasing. The ESRI made the point in previous commentary on the role one-off budgetary measures have played. Those measures are coming to an end – the energy credits, for example – but prices are still rising. There might be some move down in individual items, but the overall price of the basket of goods is still rising. How will that impact some of the most vulnerable families in our State?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Back in the winter commentary, we said we expected inflation this year to be 7.1%. Our estimate for this year will be quite a bit lower than that. Like many people, we felt a couple of weeks ago the rate would come down even more. Clearly, the energy price element is coming down. There is no doubt about that. However, food prices and other areas have started to pick up. Recently there was an anomaly of housing costs, a key component of the consumer price index, going up. Ironically, they are going up because interest rates are going up.

The ECB has released interesting data showing profits are rising much faster than wages. There was much speculation we would have a wage growth spiral, which has not materialised, but there is significant profit growth in many sectors, including construction, manufacturing and mining. Agriculture saw the biggest rise in profits across Europe, compared with wage growth. Is price gouging going on in the middle of all of this?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

It is very hard to tell.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

We do not have any evidence of price gouging in specific markets around the inflation problem. It is clear profits are rising to historical highs.

I think that is quite a feature of the current inflationary environment.

I will address the point the Deputy made about the degree to which we have seen any wage-price spiral emerge. I refer to one of the risks that we would often see when one has an inflationary-driven cycle that first starts with these energy prices, which are outside of our control due to international markets, and which start to pass through. We have seen some of the big increases towards the end of last year, from October onwards, with regard to the pass-through to residential and business customers. It can often take some time then for the second round effects to hit. One of the risks that we see is that we may see some of those energy price inflationary series slipping a bit with regard to the overall price growth. However, then one starts to get that feeding through into wages, and one gets these second round effects coming in with a little bit of a lag. That is the risk that one would not necessarily see now, but the composition inflation will change away from these exogenous factors - the energy price factors - towards the more domestic factors.

One of the points we always note is that when you see the unemployment rate at these historical lows, very often you will see a pick-up in the core inflation that is associated with long-term periods of unemployment levels. These are really the risks. We feel the inflationary environment is coming down a little bit, but there is a compositional shift that could happen.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

I would like to go back to the tail end of Deputy Doherty's question about the impacts. It is clear, overall, that inflationary cycles tend to hit the people at the lower end of income distribution. I do not think there is any doubt about that, and particularly in an Irish context what we notice is that it was also people in rural areas, because obviously they have a higher spend on energy-related issues. In the next commentary, our tax welfare benefits team will be looking at the recent Government measures outlined in February, and they will be doing some analysis on that. That will be in the next commentary, which is out next week, and it will deal with the distributional issues around that.

The point I was picking up on was that the ESRI did its analysis, and the one-off measures have created a buffer for some of our lower-income households, but the prices are locked in and are continuing to rise. With regard to those one-off measures, the €200 is spent. It can not be spent again. Social welfare rates did not increase to buffer them. If you look at it just through a point in time, there was a buffer there, but without deflation is it not the case that these households are now going to become quite poor compared to where they were last year?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

The bottom line, and it is an important point which the Deputy made at the outset and which has to be borne in mind, is that even with a much lower inflation rate this year, the cost of living is still much higher this year than what it was last year and two years ago. Prices and the cost-of-living pressures generally are much higher across.

On whether other measures are required as the inflationary pressures evolve through the year, it is just a case of seeing how the inflationary trends persist or evolve over a period of time. However, there is no doubt about it that even if you have a reduced pace of inflation this year, the cost-of-living pressures are still considerably higher than they were before.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

One element to add is that in the recent update on its economic outlook, the International Monetary Fund, IMF, suggested that there should be a switch away from these broad fiscal measures towards tailored, targeted supports that would address specifically the type of household that is exposed to food price inflation and energy price inflation. The levels have increased to such a degree in the past period of time, and even if we are forecasting lower inflation, that does not mean any reduction in prices. That is just a lower price increase. Seeing how prices evolve over the summer period, when we come into the outlook for the winter energy prices next year, it will be a case of having to take an evidence-based decision on whether there is a need for further tailored, targeted measures that would really be supportive of those specific households where there are these challenges. Lower income households in particular are exposed to these.

I thank Deputy Doherty. We will move on to Deputy Boyd Barrett.

I thank the ESRI, and I was listening to the earlier part. I might follow on from some of the questions around housing, because the ESRI and economists are generally very cautious in their use of words. In cautious words, the witnesses are painting a rather grim scenario, would they agree? That is probably accurate, unfortunately, with regard to the housing situation that we are facing. The Taoiseach, Deputy Leo Varadkar, in the context of the eviction debate and the decision to lift the eviction ban, said that most people who may be evicted will not end up homeless. He actually said things like. He said they will probably find somewhere else to live. I found it to be quite a remarkable statement, because is it not an accurate description of the current housing situation to say that almost anything that is coming on the market is completely unaffordable? Has the ESRI looked at that?

To me, even when the famous supply materialises, the gap between what is coming on the market and what people could actually afford with regard to rent or mortgage payments is just enormous. It is unbridgeable for huge numbers of people. I would be interested to hear the witnesses' thoughts on that. Cherrywood, which is very close to me, is the biggest residential development in the country at the moment. They have increase densities and there are going to be up 9,000 or 10,000 units there. Some of the early units are coming on stream now, and the rent for a two-bedroom apartment is €2,600. The witnesses could probably do the maths quicker than I could, but that is in the region of €30,000 a year that you would have to pay in rent. That is just completely unaffordable for vast swathes of our working population, never mind people who are dependent on pensions or welfare payments.

I would like to hear a little bit more from the witnesses. Do they accept that there is a yawning gap between what is out there, and what people could afford to pay, even when the famous supply arrives? I cannot see any prospect of the supply reaching a point where prices might start to reduce, and that rents or house prices might start to come down. In that context, would it be fair to say that we have got to think very urgently about some radical measures to do something about that? Even business people are now saying that this is a major problem for their ability to recruit and retain workers in whole numbers of areas. Maybe the witnesses would have something to say about that, and the potential impacts on the ability of other sectors of the economy to start to function, or to sustain themselves.

In that context, I know that people say controls on rents or State measures to control the price of land, which were mentioned, maybe do not solve all of the problem. However, do we not need to consider them at this stage? We are at that point where there is nothing in the medium term that is going to change that situation. That is what the witnesses seem to be saying. Around Helsinki in Finland, which one of the few countries where homelessness has reduced, they have nationalised all of the building land. The state has just taken it all over, and they are controlling, quite centrally, the planning and building of housing, and what type of housing it is. In fact, the preponderant thing has to be the delivery of stuff that is affordable or social, because the market is failing, and that is why they took that move.

I wonder if the witnesses have any thoughts on that, and about a more serious form of rent control. The thing I would favour is having maximum rent levels, which ensure that rents simply cannot be higher than what ordinary workers are able to afford.

I am not saying that is the entire solution because we obviously need the supply to ramp up as well. However, should these be things we start to consider, given there is fairly catastrophic market failure at present?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

We have been making these points to the Deputy for a number of years now. We agree with much of what he said. Dr. O'Toole and I, and colleagues from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, including Mr. Eoin Corrigan, did detailed work and a fairly deep dive into housing affordability in the Irish market. We looked at the survey on income and living conditions from 2018 going back to 2005. It is very clear that affordability, and issues around it, is what we call a structural issue in the sense it is not something that arrived today or yesterday. It has been there for a good many years in the Irish market. What the ESRI used to classify or define it was the proportion of people's income spent on housing cost, whether it was rent or house purchases. It is clear a substantial cohort of the private rental sector market were just above the supports payments. These were people who were paying very high proportions of their income on housing costs, mainly rents. This cohort has been there for a long period. This problem has been in existence for a considerable time.

Overall, our assessment of supply, as I said to Deputy Doherty, is the pandemic has brought a lot of turbulence as far as the supply side of the market is concerned. Looking at the underlying trend, it is clear supply levels have been increasing since 2017 or 2018. The pandemic has impacted on that and we have had ups and downs. We will probably get more than 30,000 units next year. On the impact that will have on affordability and prices, we have argued for a while that we will still need, even with that supply and greater levels of supply, a significant portion of that supply to be social and affordable in order to address this issue. It will not be resolved purely through basic supply and demand. We need a significant proportion of that increase to be social and affordable to address the ongoing affordability issue.

On whether we think prices will start to fall, we could see that scenario, particularly if interest rates continue to increase over the medium term. We have had significant increases in interest rates for many people over the past while. If inflationary pressures persist and we continue to see higher interest rates over the next period, that will have a fairly significant impact on housing demand. It is instantaneous in a sense because it directly affects people's ability regarding what they can borrow, which has an almost automatic knock-on effect on prices. There is a possibility of prices beginning to fall towards the end of the year and into next year. That would not be our baseline forecast at this stage but we could see that scenario occurring. If we continue to see supply increasing, as I said, next year or the year after that, in that context, we could see a scenario where prices start to stabilise and even come down a little.

On the other sectors of the economy and their ability to perform, it is interesting, from our point of view, to look at the housing market over the past five or six years. When we looked at the housing market and the issues around it initially, including affordability challenges etc., we did so almost in isolation. It is clear, however, that over the past three to four years, both in terms of the overall headline data from the economy and from talking to different agencies, including people in the IDA and even those in local authorities who deal a lot with multinationals, for example, the point they made to me was that increasingly multinationals want to see what the housing strategies of local authorities are, for example. These companies have clearly identified that housing costs and pressures are a significant issue and challenge to our competitiveness as an economy. It is clear that issue has been and is growing all the time with the rising prices and rising costs.

The land issue, again, as I outlined to Deputy Doherty, is the one area where the Government can have a direct impact as far as the cost side of the housing market is concerned. I will flag the issue that we will see local authorities back in the market for building housing, and we also have the Land Development Agency and the approved housing bodies, AHBs, so there will be a lot of competition for land in future. It is important that we manage land more effectively. We outlined the case for the site value tax and we warmly welcomed the residential zoned land tax. These need to be integrated but, in an ideal world, I see a scenario where we increasingly adopt the continental model of local authorities providing and servicing the land and then getting private developers to build on it in order to reach the kind of supply levels we need. That would be the most efficient outcome as far as the housing market is concerned. In the short term, however, measures such as the site value tax and the residential zoned land tax will ensure we incentivise the use of land as much as possible and do not have the hoarding issues that clearly have been there in the market.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

I completely agree with a couple of those points. It is very clear the composition of the supply gap matters. The bottom end of income distribution, internationally, is very clearly the area that always struggles with high housing cost. Ireland is no different in that regard. When we say we support the ramping up of supply, the supply that will be most impactful for that group is the expansion in social and affordable housing supply, either through local authorities or AHB activity. Whatever way that can be done as quickly as possible is the route to go. For those households, the cost of providing that supply to the supplier, be it an AHB or local authority, could be high. If rent were to be set based on that cost, it could be high. At present in Ireland we have the differential rent system so the household itself is exposed to that payment rather than the cost bit. There are pros and cons to that but, for the household specifically, that is a beneficial element and can reduce the housing cost substantially. We say to absolutely ramp up supply but, within that, there has to be a very large component of social and affordable housing supply. That is a very important element.

On the rental sector and rent price controls, we have a system of rent price stabilisation measures. The rent pressure zones are in place at present. There is a 2% cap that, in real terms, is less than the rate of inflation. Internationally, when you look at these measures, the reason evidence highlights the negative effects of these types of instrument is the studies in very many international contexts - there are hundreds of studies on rent controls internationally across countries, contexts and different jurisdictions - clearly indicate that sitting tenants are big beneficiaries of rent controls. Tenants looking to enter the market from outside it suffer due to supply contractions and drops in maintenance expenditure. Those are the pros and cons to these measures and the international evidence is quite voluminous around them. When we think about this type of approach, we need to understand there are pros and cons to making these policy choices in the long term. Notwithstanding how we regulate our prices in that market, the key issue is the supply gap at the lower end of income distribution.

Dr. McQuinn said he could envisage a situation where if interest rates go up, that might impact on demand, if I heard him correctly, and if supply continues to ramp up, he could envisage a situation where, potentially, prices and rents begin to fall. Is he sure about that?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Certainly on the prices, yes. We could see that, if interest rates keep rising. Now, again, of course, interest rates-----

I will elaborate on the question slightly. Objectively, demand will not go down in the sense that people will need housing.

Regardless of what interest rates are, the same number of people who are projected to need housing will still need it. They may not have that demand backed by the willingness of banks to lend them the money, but they will still need to be housed. If interest rates going up means banks will not lend them money, that demand will land somewhere else in the housing sector, but the demand will still be there. In objective terms the demand is the demand and demographics will decide what that demand is even if the willingness of banks to lend reduces a particular type of demand.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

That is the crucial point. Prices could moderate in those circumstances. However, there might be additional pressure on the rental side as a result. There could be a shift. As the Deputy stated, the demographics will still be such that there will be a demand for housing. It is just a question of whether people shift more to renting even though rent levels are where they are. It could lead to that because people will not be able to borrow the same amount of money as they were able to last year. People approaching a bank to ascertain the maximum amount they could borrow will find it is less now than it was 12 months ago. When that is spread across the economy, it has an impact on the prices. It could result in a shift towards the rental side, putting even more pressure on the rental side. If interest rates continue to rise consistently, it will have an adverse impact on demand. They are already having an adverse impact on demand I would say. If rates continue to go up, that will persist.

Dr. McQuinn indicated that we need a high proportion of social and affordable housing, given all the things we are talking about. Is the proportion the Government is envisaging high enough? I would advocate that we do not need any more unaffordable housing at all because there is a trade-off in the context of every site that is available. With a particular site which is zoned for housing development and in light of limited amounts of labour, if any of that available labour is taken to build something that is at the higher end and is therefore unaffordable, it must be at the expense of the same labour and the same land being deployed to develop social and affordable housing. Is that a reasonable assertion? We do not need anything more at the higher end. All available labour and all available zoned land should only be used to deliver social and affordable housing at this point given the problem we have.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

We would probably kind of agree. On the supply side we need a mix of social and affordable along with the private sector involvement. Ultimately, the fiscal cost to the State would be too high or certainly would be very onerous if we relied on the State to provide all the housing in the economy. In that context there is a role for the private sector which will continue. The Deputy has said it is unaffordable; the reality is that it is affordable for some people otherwise it would not be built. Therefore, there are some people who can afford it now. He can debate the distribution issues around that. Certainly, there must be a role for the private sector. It is a mix of private, social and affordable. How much should be private and how much should be social and affordable is another question. From the point of view of the commitment that would be required if the State were to fund all housing development, the cost of that would be too great.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

As Dr. McQuinn said, with the functionality of the housing market, if supply comes online at high prices, it will be purchased by somebody. While we clearly state that there is a strong need to build a high volume of social and affordable housing, other units coming on stream at the same time may unlock somebody from the rental sector who may move into that new purchased unit. More supply across the board will help to unlock the market and allow people to have more options. It is very clear that the bottlenecks in the system are concentrated around low-income households and that social and affordable housing is the key to dealing with that in the long term. More supply in the system in general can help to provide options to allow households access to more housing units.

Unfortunately, I have another engagement in a few moments and will need to leave. We raised the issue of the site value tax when dealing with the Commission on Taxation. That tax is long overdue. I live in Galway. There are places in Galway where it is badly needed, not only as a revenue raiser - obviously, that can be important as well - but also as a way to change behaviour when it comes to land banking and speculation. Is there any good data on how prevalent that land banking and land speculation is? How much would such a tax bring in? What impact would it have on easing the price of land with a certain type of zoning attached?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Unfortunately, we do not have very good data on land prices. It is something we might look into with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. We have a research programme Department and it is interested in developing a land price index. We think that is essential in evaluating the success or otherwise of these types of policies. It is necessary to have the basic indicators or parameters in order to gauge how successful or otherwise it has been. I think we will need to wait a little longer to see how effective the residential zoned land tax will be. It is very hard to judge how effective it is because without a land value or a land series, it is hard to see whether the price is going up or down because of the residential zoned land tax.

There are some very tentative signs that, even at 3%, which is quite low, it may be effective. There have been some reports in the media recently of considerable activity among developers to try to have their land declassified in order that it will not be subject to the tax. This indicates that it is focusing the mind, let us say. Unfortunately, a lot of the evidence hoarding of land, etc., has tended to be anecdotal. It is simply because we do not have the indicators in place to measure it. In the context of the residential zoned land tax and a possible site value tax, it will be very important for us to have these indicators in place in order to judge how successful or otherwise the policies prove to be.

I apologise, but I need to nip out. I will be back for the second session.

I have just joined the meeting because I was at another event. I apologise for that. I was going to ask about the vacant property tax. The witnesses covered it in some of their replies to Deputy Mairéad Farrell's questions.

Given that Amazon recently announced that it plans to lay off 9,000 more workers, does the ESRI believe that Ireland's economic forecast should be revised? Has the ESRI a rough estimate of how many employees might be affected by the sad news of job losses in this State?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

We have been following the labour market side. As I outlined in my statement, the whole issue of concentration risks is a growing one as far as the overall macro performance is concerned. Obviously we have identified pharma and ICT as being the two sectors that have very strongly contributed. There has been a correction on the ICT side. It is clear that there is a significant adjustment taking place in the global ICT sector, which may be due to the post-pandemic situation. Probably a lot of these firms were too robust and bullish about their prospects mainly because they had done very well during the pandemic so now we are seeing a lot of redundancies and job lay-offs.

We pointed out in our last commentary that last year, between quarter 2 and quarter 3 there was a fall-off in the number of people employed in the ICT sector of somewhere in the region of 10,000 people in the economy. However, the Q4 data, when it was released, showed that nearly all of those jobs had come back on-stream. Clearly, the sector is still quite dynamic in terms of job possibilities and the headline unemployment rate continues to fall even to an historical low. Over the more medium-term, it is clear that the ICT sector will not diminish in importance any time soon. ICT is central to how we operate and function so I do not think there is a systemic long-term decline but there could be more job losses over the short to medium term.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

Our work, as part of the last quarterly commentary, and work done by the Central Bank highlight the extent to which the economy is reliant on the ICT sector and the figures show: it is 20% of overall output; 10% of the national wage bill; over 6% of employment; and provides a quarter of our corporation tax. The ICT sector is very important for the functionality of the broader economy. However, because the sector is going through a period of adjustment, and the demand for digital services was perhaps assessed to be higher than what it has turned out to be and, as the pandemic period wanes, the sector is likely to experience challenges as it adjusts to a new normal. It is unlikely that Ireland will get away scot-free in terms of the adjustment given so many of the very large firms are located in Ireland and are such big employers. Notwithstanding all that, Ireland has some of the best productive companies in the world so the ICT sector is a great sector to have as a support to our economy and it must be a key element of our foreign direct investment, FDI, strategy to keep these firms here.

Does the ESRI classify windfall taxes differently from the method used by the Government?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

It is very difficult to classify a windfall tax. Ultimately, if you were to do so in an unconstrained way then you would consider the performance of individual firms. That data is not available to us nor it is available to the officials in the Department of Finance. It is important to define a windfall tax even if a relatively straightforward or simple rule is applied. For instance, the Department at the start of each year compiles forecasts for the individual tax heading. So the Department forecasts that corporation tax receipts will increase by, say, 5% this year and income tax will increase by 6% or whatever. The way that the ESRI has examined the matter in the past is to take what actually happened, at the end of the year, and compare that to the forecast but of course that all depends on the forecast at the start of the year. It is a little bit unclear how the windfall tax is determined at present. We think, even if it is a very straightforward simple rule of thumb, then that should be outlined.

The bottom line is €2 billion was put in the fund last year and €4 billion may be put in the fund this year. Again, given the way in which the fiscal accounts are likely to pan out next year another €4 billion could be put in the fund. So pretty soon there will be a fund of around €10 billion, which is a sizeable amount of resources. Therefore, it is important that we understand how the money is allocated and decide what to do with it or know how to deal with it.

The windfall tax has been mentioned in the context of the NRF. Dr. McQuinn has described how one takes anything that qualifies as an excess based on the forecast or benchmark. Does he mean an excess as defined by the Department of Finance?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

That is the way it has been done in the past. Ideally, we want to be able to determine what we think is the sustainable level of taxes, then we look at what actually comes in and identify the difference between the two figures. The problem is estimating a sustainable rate because we are dealing with a type of black box. I mean we do not know the individual firms, their practices and there are confidentiality clauses etc. around that so all that makes identifying a figure very difficult. So we end up having to use relatively straightforward rules of thumb.

This is particularly relevant for Ireland because it so often happens to us that our corporation tax exceeds what we expected.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Exactly, and why it has done so by the amount that it has.

Can that be linked to our new 5% increased annual spending rule?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

An important point about the NRF is how the fund is used.

That was going to be my next question.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

There will be, say, €6 billion in the fund by the end of this year and, possibly, another €4 billion by the end of next year so then the questions are when do we use it and what do we use it on. We have made the point in our statement about the fiscal rules.

I know that the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has made the following point in a paper it released on this issue a couple of years ago. How does the fund feed into the spending rules? Can the €10 billion or some part of it, be used? Would the money be used as part of the calculation, as part of the spending rules that are outlined in the fiscal rules? That is unclear at this point in time. Those are the kind of issues that need to be drawn out. For example, can a chunk of that funding be used for some specific reason and would it be compatible with the fiscal rules, which are being reformed at present?

Dr. McQuinn mentioned the sectors of pensions, climate change, housing and health in his opening statement. There is a major difference because they often fit in very different categories of capital expenditure and pensions are a world unto themselves.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Yes, exactly. As I said, there will be a sizeable reserve fund pretty soon so we need to start having a debate about how it is going to be used and where. There are other issues that need to be thought about. For example, putting a huge amount of money into the economy at any point in time does come with risks, particularly an economy that is performing as strongly as the Irish economy. There are issues around making sure that inflationary pressures are not stimulated by doing do. There are a lot of different parts to this but we must decide where investment priorities lie, how much of the fund should be used per annum and how much should be used over a multi-annual period. That is the nitty-gritty that needs to be teased out.

The site value tax is a policy that has floated around in my party for a very long time. Economists tend to like the idea because it is very clear and effective. However, very few EU countries apply it in its purest sense and tend to use a much more mediated version. Certainly we looked at the report compiled by the Commission on Taxation and Welfare that recommended we keep the current housing tax set up and simply apply the tax to land.

Would the witnesses like to comment on that? Is that how they envisage it? Other countries in the EU have that kind of half-and-half version.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

I will make a general comment on that. In its purest form we are talking about something like a land value tax, which has different gradations depending on what that land is for. The residential housing within that would be exposed to a taxation measure like we have now with the residential property tax. Land that is zoned and designated where we want to build housing would attract a higher taxation rate because if one is seeking to activate the land, one is putting a cost on keeping it out of the system. Then there are exemptions. For example, agricultural land would be exempt. That is a very pure form-----

Is Dr. O'Toole describing what we have now in terms of housing taxation as a subset of site value tax?

Dr. Conor O'Toole

No. It is a general view, if we want to look at what the purest form would be of a graduated land value tax. A site value tax would come in as a cost penalty for land that is already zoned and ready to go for development purposes. That is where it would fit into the system. The residential property tax that is paid on existing residential properties would continue as it is. It is to use a fiscal instrument to ensure there is a cost to holding land that the State has designated is to be used for development purposes. That is really why a measure like this would be brought in be the fiscal instrument that would look at that cost.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

There was a good degree of commentary on the international perspective; there were a couple of notable contributions on it recently. The basic point is that we are always talking about diversifying the tax base, so it is a notable contribution in that regard. Second, as a small open economy, we are always focused on the issue of competitiveness and we have to be. We must be very careful with what we do with things like labour tax and tax on capital because we can see investment flow out of the economy as quickly as it comes in. That is why the site value tax has an appeal, in the sense that it is essentially taxing an unproductive asset in terms of land. We are not going to see a reduction in the amount of land available because of this, whereas if we target other areas, such as labour or capital taxes, it could have an adverse outcome.

I will ask a final question and then bring in Deputy Canney. We talked a little bit about inflation and we have the Central Bank coming in after this session. Would the witnesses like to make a comment around the current banking crisis in the United States and whether they believe it will impact on rates and inflation in general? I presume they are keeping an eye on that.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

Yes, very much so. We both worked for the Central Bank previously, so we always have an interest in financial stability considerations. We are watching the situation with significant interest and concern about the potential implications especially from the point of view of investment. That is one area, particularly in view of what happened in the United States with Silicone Valley Bank, SVB.

In terms of the domestic application, while we can never be complacent about these issues, given that any issues related to banking fragility can be huge, as we know to our cost. However, as far as domestic institutions are concerned, broadly speaking, if anything, they have been on the conservative side over the past ten years in terms of their lending practices. Obviously, there have been lots of regulatory changes within the euro area and that has probably contributed to making the Irish banking sector being more stable than it has been for some time. We can never be totally sure in terms of some of the investment decisions of banks on long-term fixed bonds. That is where some of these financial institutions have become particularly vulnerable because of the hike in rates. In the absence of Irish institutions availing of those, however, we cannot see it having a huge impact on the domestic financial sector. Broadly speaking, it could have implications for interest rate policy. It could cause the ECB to slow down its policy of rate increases, in particular if there are more tremors, if one likes, in European banking markets. It is obviously something of concern but at this stage I do not think it is something which is going to adversely impact the domestic banking system.

Deputies Canney and Durkan have joined us. I advise them that we are running a little late due to the vote that took place at 5.30 p.m. We have two sessions tonight. I am very aware that representatives from the Central Bank are waiting outside, so I might ask people to keep their comments fairly short if that is okay. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae has also arrived.

I was listening to the discussion. I will raise two issues. The first point relates to what was said about the upheaval within the banking sector in various parts of the world at the moment and how it might affect the global economy. Do the witnesses envisage any risk to Ireland in terms of our corporation tax take in the next year or two years as a result of anything that might be going on there?

The second issue relates to the amount of money we are putting into the rainy day fund. Do the witnesses have any suggestions as to how we might use the money for the betterment of society in Ireland?

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

On the corporation tax take, a consistent theme of what we have been saying in recent commentary, and going back to the earlier contributions, is the issue of concentration risk. That shows up on the corporation tax side in terms of the huge contributions to the corporation tax take from certain key sectors of the multinational part of the economy, in particular ICT and pharma. To the extent that any of these financial sector issues could have adverse outcomes for those sectors, then that would be a way in which the corporation tax take could be impacted. On the ICT side, Dr. O'Toole might have something to say about the SVB issue, where there may be some knock-on effects.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

There were two questions there, one on the banking sector. I will add my voice to what Dr. McQuinn mentioned. On the US banking sector challenges, the failure of SVB appears to have been one of those cases of a typical maturity mismatch, a bank run, coupled with management failures and the concentration of risk, particularly in the ICT sector. That is the kind of scenario that has taken banks out for centuries. That is the risk they carry when they do a maturity mismatch.

The long-term effects, in particular with SVB and with the Irish economy being so exposed to the ICT sector is that if the failure of that bank leads to a global increase in risk premia, and a global tightening of financial conditions for productive firms in the ICT sector, that we would get to a stage where credit to the sector would be rationed and over time investment in the sector drops. That could have longer term implications for the productive capacity of the US economy and for these firms on a more global basis. The broader sector can reprice the risk. It can say that ICT firms are riskier than they were and that is a potential risk to the long-term scarring of the productive capacity if those financial constraints come up. There is no evidence of that yet, but that is a particular risk.

It certainly does appear that it is an extremely fast-moving scenario. It is often very difficult to see how these chains of contagion unravel in funding structures for banks. They can look fine and then suddenly they start to unravel quickly. It does appear that the situation in the US at the present moment has been contained with some of the measures that have been put in place, but that could change very quickly.

The Irish banks are much better capitalised than they were at the onset of the financial crisis, so this is not a case of us having a domestic credit boom that has gone wrong and having a banking sector that is exposed to that. This is an international issue. We are much better capitalised. We have better funding structures than we did before so while there is always a risk, it is certainly a much more resilient sector than we had in the past.

The second question was about the choices for NRF, the so-called rainy day fund.

The risk we see in this is that there are all these receipts, which end up being windfall, the Government is tied into its current expenditure plans and then suddenly there is a gap in the budget if they disappear. The choices with that type of fund are to save the moneys and put them into liquid assets, spend them on infrastructure bottlenecks or use them to pay down debts. Those are the three available choices. If one is thinking about spending them, one has to consider that these are very large funds and to ask whether the economy has the productive capacity at this particular time to absorb the funding to deal with, say, infrastructural bottlenecks in housing, health and the climate transition. They might all be really worthy places to invest in order to deal with bottlenecks, but a long-term plan is needed for how to put that funding into an economy, as Dr. McQuinn said, that is growing relatively quickly at present. These are the policy trade-offs and choices that are available and they should be on the table for consideration in regard to this type of fund.

The next speaker is Deputy Michael Healy-Rae, followed by Deputy Durkan. I ask Deputy Healy-Rae to be mindful that I need to conclude this session at 7.30 p.m.

I will be mindful of that. I apologise for having to leave earlier to speak in the Dáil. I thank the witnesses for their contributions. The first point I raise relates to the increasing pressure people are under because of the rise in mortgage interest rates. There is concern around the implications and sustainability of that if we take it in combination with the increase in energy and heating costs. This is affecting people who have bought their home and have a mortgage. Another question is around where it leaves the people who are unable to get a mortgage. What will we do in the long term for working people in this country who might have not one but two incomes - often two good incomes - but who are being refused a mortgage by the banks? We are in a crazy situation whereby it was easier to borrow money 30 or 40 years ago than it is today.

I will not repeat myself this evening because I have taken my calming-down tablets. I am not going to remind everybody about the signs in banks saying "We're backing brave". They should be taken out and burnt because the banks are not doing that. What are we going to do with banks that are sitting on billions of euro but will not give out that money to highly respectable young men and women who are guilty of only one thing, namely, trying to set up homes? They are starting out in life together and want to start a family. They are not looking for a handout from the State or anything from anybody. All they want is the right to borrow money and, instead of paying rent, to pay off a mortgage on their home diligently every month. They will not even be looked at by the banks. Surely to God the backbone of any society is the banking system and the need for banks to support communities.

I have great time for how the Chairman chairs this committee. I have great time for the experience of members of the committee. If we as a committee are to achieve one thing, it should be to highlight the wrong done by the banks. They will not part with the money and give it to people who are willing to pay it back. They are putting obstacle after obstacle in their way. It is disheartening to hear these stories from people who are leading frugal personal lives. They do not drink or smoke. They are not out wasting money. They are prudent and have saved up deposits. The thanks they are getting for it is to be told "No" by the banks. They are not even being entertained by the banks.

I will ask the witnesses to come in at this point. The Deputy's question is about access to mortgages. There is a broader question about access to credit more generally, including for businesses.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

On the interest rates, as I said to Deputy Doherty, the most recent data show the higher rates feeding into higher housing costs, which, in turn, is feeding into higher inflation. This is rather ironic because interest rates usually are put up to calm inflation. That is an anomaly at present. Any increase in interest rates that is absorbed has an effect. I would say it has already had an impact on housing demand because the impact is felt straight away. It affects householders and it affects prospective buyers going into a bank looking for a mortgage. The interest rate going up almost automatically means the amount of money they will be lent is less than what they would have got if they had gone in six months ago with the same income level but when the rate was lower. Rising rates have an almost instantaneous effect on housing demand. As we said earlier, we may see a scenario over the next period, if interest rates continue to increase, whereby that could result in house price growth beginning to moderate and possibly prices levelling off or even falling at some stage. That is the way interest rates operate, particularly in the housing market.

Regarding lending conditions, the Deputy has made a crucial point that people are recognising, which is that the changes that have occurred in the financial system over the past ten years since the financial crash, that is, the changes in regulatory conditions, mainly at a euro area level but also the macroprudential changes we have introduced in this country, have basically meant that our banks have become very conservative and prudent in their lending practices. In general, that is a good thing, although it does lead to people being frustrated when applications for credit are refused. It means we have an issue with people not being able to access the levels of credit that are required to get into the housing market. It also causes problems on the supply side when developers and so on cannot access credit in order to build. There is a growing recognition that the State will have to play a greater role in this, certainly in providing finance for housing development and possibly even by providing more finance on the mortgage side for people looking to get onto the ladder. That is almost a follow-on implication of the tighter regulation we have seen in the financial sector over the past ten years.

The upside to this, going back to one of the previous questions, is that it means our financial sector probably is in a much more prudent place now than it has been for quite some time. Even with all the tremors we are seeing in the international financial sector, whether in regard to Credit Suisse or the recent issues in the US, the Irish banks are in a better place to deal with those kinds of problems. Clearly, they were not in that space 15 or 16 years ago when the crash happened and the credit bubble collapsed.

I know Deputy Healy-Rae wants to come back in but we have witnesses from the Central Bank waiting outside the room and we have another session to get through tonight.

I just want to make a final point. It will not take much time.

I ask the Deputy to do so quickly.

Prudence by the banks is welcome. However, what I would call prudent is not engaging in the stupidity bank managers did 20 years ago when a young couple went in seeking money for a house and were told they could also get money for a holiday, a car, black tarmacadam outside the door and big, steel gates that operated electronically. Prudence to me is cutting out that nonsense.

I want the banks to recognise that young couples need X amount of money to put a roof over their head, even if it is a bare, frugal roof, and to give them the start they need to do so. That is what I am looking for. I agree with the need for prudence. That is sound talk by Dr. McQuinn. However, there is a big difference between prudence and saying "No" and thereby leaving a generation behind. I do not want to be part of a country in which lovely young couples are being left behind and we are telling them they are consigned to renting forever because the banks do not have the word I will not say to give them a loan. That is inherently wrong. These people deserve the same start in life as the likes of me got years ago, when I was able to go in, shake hands with the bank manager and ask him to give me money and take a chance on me.

These people deserve the same type of a get-up that the rest of us got. Our guests in their roles and we as politicians should all be striving for that. We must keep our feet on the ground and common sense to the fore. We must give these lovely people a chance in life. That is all I am looking for.

I thank the Deputy. I will not bring him back in because I want to give Deputy Durkan a chance. I encourage the Deputy to be brief as I will soon look to start the session with the representatives of the Central Bank.

Does the Chair not know I am always brief? I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Michael Healy-Rae. As public representatives, we have to deal with the situation on the ground all the time. That is reality. The banking system must be alert to and aware of the need to respond quickly to the people about whom Deputy Healy-Rae has spoken. The local authorities also need to do so. There was a time when you could arrange for what was called an SDA, a small loan available under the Act of 1966. A person was almost guaranteed a loan from a local authority, particularly if he or she could not get a loan anywhere else. After a while, local authorities became reluctant to give money on the basis that some people might default. People always defaulted in certain circumstances, although we do not want to encourage that. However, the local authorities are not banks but housing agencies. There is a big difference. What happened in recent years is that local authorities have been running their housing supports as if they were banks. It is not good and cannot work.

There is illustration at the moment of how quickly the international markets and banks are affected. Any kind of a bubble in any part of the globe, such as was the case at the Silicon Valley Bank, can take off quickly and have repercussions all over. Credit Suisse was regarded as safe, solid and all that kind of stuff. I know there were considerable problems and many crises in that institution for many years, but the fact of the matter is it was affected and latched onto another bank. That kind of thing illustrates to me how quickly the banking system can be affected in today's world by some indication of instability.

The representatives of the Central Bank might be able to answer the Deputy's question.

I will return to that. We must be awfully careful about what we do with the rainy day fund. People asked in recent years why we do not spend the rainy day fund because they thought it was raining at the time. It turns out it was not raining then. As we now know, the rapidity with which things can happen in the financial sector is so serious that we do not know what we might need in the future. My advice is that we hold on to what we have and use the rainy day fund not to spend but to hold as a means of stabilising the system in the event we need to.

We know the country is in a totally different situation from it was in in 2008. The confidence comes from good fine print. There are good processes and management, and reliability. If there is any doubt about what we are likely to do or if we want to spend our money quickly, foolishly or in the wrong places, we will pay a price.

Dr. Conor O'Toole

I will make two points, one of which is about the access to credit for first-time buyers in the event of their not being able to access financing from the banking sector. Local authority mortgages are currently available for households who have been rejected by the broader banking sector. We did a piece of research a couple of years ago on the previous loan instrument, which was the Rebuilding Ireland home loan, and that clearly showed it had a role to play in the market in trying to address the issues of households who were constrained from the broader banking sector. That loan instrument is there and is an important component of the market.

I completely agree with what the Deputy said about the banking sector. The stability required to maintain the interconnectedness in the funding structures of the banking environment can unravel very quickly. Risks can build up. The situation can unwind very quickly and systemic events can be the result. In the US context, it appears as if the effects are limited to certain smaller financial institutions, but that can change quickly. It is a fluid situation that could certainly change over time. One cannot be too convincing on that point.

Dr. Kieran McQuinn

For a country such as Ireland, which has a small, open economy, there is always a good case for having a reserve fund, a buffer of some sort, if you like. The question is how much of the fund should be retained for unforeseen events and how much should be diverted to areas such as housing, health or climate change etc. That is something that needs to be decided in the context of the amount available. There is certainly a case for always having a certain amount available for unanticipated consequences, which can arise, as we know.

We learned that the hard way in recent years. I am going to pause Deputy Durkan there and conclude the session because I am aware our next group of speakers is waiting outside. I thank the representatives of the ESRI for coming to the meeting. As always, they produced an astute and useful opening statement. I thank them for their attendance.

Sitting suspended at 7.37 p.m. and resumed at 7.40 p.m.

I welcome Mr. Vasileios Madouros, Dr. Martin O'Brien and Dr. Robert Kelly from the Central Bank.

Before we begin, I will explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make changes against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

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

I remind Members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where Parliament has chosen to sit. I will not permit a Member to participate where they are not adhering to this requirement. Therefore, any Member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

I now invite Mr. Madouros to give the Central Bank's opening statement.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

My name is Vas Madouros. I am the deputy governor for monetary and financial stability at the Central Bank. I am joined by my colleagues Dr. Robert Kelly, director of economics and statistics, and Dr. Martin O'Brien, head of our Irish economic analysis division. I thank the committee for inviting us to appear before it. We very much welcome the opportunity to discuss the economic and fiscal outlook with Members. In my opening statement I will draw on our latest macroeconomic assessment, published in our quarterly bulletin in early March, and cover some medium-term challenges for the public finances. It is worth flagging upfront that the projections in the quarterly bulletin were completed before the most recent period of volatility in international financial markets. In light of those developments, there is additional uncertainty around the baseline projections for growth and inflation.

As one would expect, the Central Bank has been monitoring and evaluating global financial market developments, including through close engagement with our European counterparts and, domestically, under the auspices of Ireland's financial stability group. The Irish and euro area banking sector is resilient to a wide range of potential adverse shocks, with strong capital and liquidity positions. Moreover, as the European Central Bank, ECB, president remarked last week, the Eurosystem stands ready to respond as necessary to preserve price stability and financial stability in the euro area.

Let me turn to the medium-term economic and fiscal outlook. While macroeconomic conditions are still challenging, primarily due to the continued high level of inflation, the Irish economy, overall, has proven resilient. Indeed, recent activity levels have been somewhat stronger than we would have expected going into the winter months.

Modified domestic demand is estimated to have grown by 8.2% last year, driven by a particularly strong recovery in the first half of the year. In the second half of 2022 the economy slowed significantly as the economic effects of higher inflation began to take hold, limiting households' purchasing power and business sentiment. We expect the two distinct halves of last year to be reversed in 2023. As inflation moderates over the course of the year, we expect a pick-up in real household disposable income, gradually restoring consumers' purchasing power and supporting domestic economic activity. Our latest forecast is for modified domestic demand to grow by 3.1% this year, 2.9% in 2024 and 2.6% in 2025.

The robust performance of the labour market in Ireland is one of the clearest indications of the strength of current demand conditions. The unemployment rate remains at two-decade lows, and the post-pandemic growth in employment has been remarkably strong, with almost 2.6 million people working during the last quarter of last year. Relative to the available supply of labour, the number of vacancies in the economy remains particularly high. This labour market tightness, together with an expectation of some degree of real-wage catch-up this year, underpins our forecast of a pick-up in nominal wage growth in the near term, above recent historical averages.

Turning to inflation, it is likely that headline inflation has now peaked. In the absence of further energy price shocks, we expect it to moderate this year and next, as the effect of the spike in energy prices abates. Headline harmonised index of consumer prices, HICP, inflation is projected to average 5% this year, having averaged 8.1% last year, with further declines in 2024 and 2025 to 3.2% and 2.2%, respectively. Nevertheless, core inflation, which excludes the direct impact of energy and food prices and provides a measure of underlying inflationary dynamics, is likely to prove more persistent than headline inflation. This reflects the fact that the second-round effects of the energy price shock for business costs and, ultimately, the prices of goods and services continue to filter through to the economy. It also reflects our expectation of continued labour market tightness and more binding capacity constraints in the economy. Overall, core inflation is expected to average 3.5% this year, having averaged 4.6% last year, and to be just below 3% in 2024 and 2025.

There is, however, significant uncertainty around the precise path for inflation. That uncertainty stems from a number of factors - global developments, including the potential for escalation of geopolitical tensions and the impact of the reopening of China's economy on commodity prices; the evolving transmission of tighter monetary policy, both in Ireland and globally; the dynamics between profit margins, wages and prices; and the persistence of the imbalance between aggregate supply and demand conditions in the economy.

Restoring price stability is a necessary part of creating the conditions for macroeconomic stability. The societal costs of high and unstable inflation are very high. Through achieving price stability, monetary policy creates an environment in which firms and households can make long-term plans and decisions that generate the productivity and innovation that ultimately drives growth and prosperity.

With euro area inflation projected to remain too high for too long, the ECB's governing council has continued to raise policy rates, most recently by 50 basis points last week, to ensure a timely return of inflation to its 2% medium-term target.

Looking ahead, in the context of high uncertainty, the ECB's governing council will take a data-dependent approach, which will be determined by its assessment of the inflation outlook in light of the incoming economic and financial data, the dynamics of underlying inflation and the strength of monetary policy transmission.

Turning to the public finances, the general government balance is estimated to have moved from a deficit of 3% of GNI* in 2021 to a surplus of 2.3% last year. This reflects strong growth in tax receipts generally, but particularly in respect of corporation tax receipts. Exchequer data for the opening months of 2023 remain favourable and, despite the more moderate pace of economic growth this year, the general government surplus is forecast to increase to 2.7% of GNI*. A further improvement in the general government balance is expected over the medium term, reflecting the fact that the remaining temporary spending, linked to cost-of-living measures and humanitarian supports, is expected to wind down, leading to a surplus of about 4.8% in 2025.

The general government debt ratio is projected to decline in the coming years but to remain elevated. Having increased to just under 110% of GNI* during the pandemic, the debt ratio is estimated to have declined to 82.6% last year and is projected to stand at 65% by 2025.

Despite the increase in sovereign borrowing rates over the past year, debt dynamics are expected to remain favourable, supported by robust nominal medium-term growth and growing primary surpluses. From a funding perspective, the value of bonds maturing between now and 2025 is relatively low, and the current market rates for refinancing this debt remain below the rates at which those bonds were originally issued. Coupled with the large cash balances held by the National Treasury Management Agency, NTMA, this gives the State some additional flexibility from a funding perspective.

Now I turn to some of the more medium-term challenges for the public finances. Domestic policy has an important role to play in how the economy adjusts to the shock presented by the war in Ukraine.

Fiscal support has been necessary to protect those most vulnerable in our society from the energy price shock. From the perspective of macroeconomic management, it is important that fiscal supports are targeted, temporary and tailored to preserving incentives to consume less energy. Ensuring the temporary policy measures that support demand conditions are unwound in a timely fashion will reduce the potential of adding to medium-term inflationary pressures.

More broadly, the portion of corporation tax receipts that does not appear to reflect domestic economic activity and stems from a relatively small number of firms continues to grow to an estimated €10 billion per annum. Such revenues are subject to sudden change highlighting the risks of them forming part of permanent expenditure. In this regard, the transfer of €6 billion to the national reserve fund since budget 2023 is a welcome development, and these resources provide the capacity to respond to future adverse shocks. In this context, as we approach the legislated asset ceiling of €8 billion, different options should be considered around the evolution of the fund in the future, both in terms of its size and its use.

Addressing infrastructure constraints that limit sustainable growth while further supporting a transition to a more resilient economy remains important. The public finances face increasing demands in this respect, most immediately in terms of addressing the infrastructure shortfall in housing, while the costs associated with the transition to net zero and the ageing of the population also need to be addressed. Funding core capital and current Government expenditure from own resources, without recourse to additional debt funding, is more likely to reduce short-term to medium-term inflationary pressures. At the same time, appropriately using public finances and wider economic policy to enable sustainable private investment is essential if the challenges of housing, climate change, and population ageing are to be addressed fully.

Going forward, policy actions and frameworks that support sustainable growth in living standards over the longer term, especially in light of the risks and challenges I have just mentioned, remain crucial. The recent Commission on Taxation and Welfare and the progress on agreeing reforms to the EU economic governance framework are noteworthy in this regard. The commission's report sets out the need to adopt a net revenue-raising strategy over an appropriate timeframe through broadening the tax base to address fiscal sustainability challenges. Alongside this, maintaining credible and meaningful benchmarks in EU and domestic frameworks to anchor fiscal policy is important, and an expenditure-based rule has benefits, especially when linked to the nominal trend growth rate of the economy.

The economy has proven resilient through a period of heightened uncertainty, in part reflecting the capacity for the public finances to operate in a countercyclical manner and provide supports to households and firms in response to external shocks. To retain such capacity against future adverse shocks and to ensure sustainability now and into the future, careful management of the public finances in light of known and emerging priorities and challenges remains necessary. I thank committee members for their time and I am very happy to take questions.

I thank Mr. Madouros for his opening statement.

I welcome our visitors. I agree in general with the sentiments Mr. Madouros has expressed. The emphasis has to be on stability. If the international financial system identifies a hint of instability in any country then things will fall rapidly and what is a healthy position today could become a very unhealthy position tomorrow. I am minded of the previous financial crisis when things happened very quickly. To those of us on the ground, and Deputy Michael Healy-Rae will remember this as well as I and many others do, the country was booming. It was recognised by some people that we were on the run down but it came perhaps quicker than we thought. We thought we would have a soft landing. Everybody said there would be a soft landing. There are no soft landings in the financial business. It is ruthless. It happens very quickly. There is the ease with which withdrawals are made. The decisions that influence stability around the globe happen in an instant because of technology. Are we still satisfied that we have taken sufficient precautions, such as the rainy day fund? Are we alert to the fact that decisions could be taken elsewhere that could create instability in the financial system around the globe? Are we happy that we can withstand this to a greater extent than ever?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I very much agree with the importance of building resilience when times are good so that resilience can be drawn down when shocks hit, whether this is for the economy as a whole, including public finances, or in the context of the financial sector. This is precisely our approach in the context of the financial sector.

As I said in my opening statement the banking system is resilient to a range of potential adverse shocks. We can see this in various ways. There are substantial capital buffers to absorb losses in future stress periods. There are substantial liquidity buffers, which are significantly above the minimum requirement, that can be used in the face of short-term liquidity shocks. There is a much more stable funding structure relative to the past. In the past there was a lot more reliance on much more volatile international sources of wholesale funding. At present the reliance is much more on domestic sources of deposits. Deposits are now greater than loans, which is the reverse of what it was in the past. More broadly there is a much more simple business model and much more prudent lending standards.

Overall there is a substantial degree of resilience across a range of dimensions to absorb potential adverse shocks and not to amplify them. A very similar dimension of resilience applies to the public finances. This is part of the reason we welcome the actions on the national reserve fund. This is one of the dimensions of helping to build resilience against future adverse shocks. As I said in my opening statement, it is important that fiscal policy can operate in a countercyclical way. This is exactly what we want so that when adverse shocks hit, fiscal policy can play its part in supporting the economy and has the capacity to do so.

Following what Deputy Healy-Rae had to say, there is one issue in this country that is causing a lot of anxiety to the younger half of the population. Remember we have an ageing population and a younger population. They are supposed to balance each other out in terms of the degree to which we rely on the younger population to fund the future and the liability of people of my age. The younger population is not happy and does not have ready access to such things as funding for housing. Their only option is to rent a house at €2,500 per month, which is incredible. They could obviously borrow and buy a house on a mortgage for much less than this. This is the situation we had back in the early 1990s. We know where that ended. Can we be assured that we can deal with the housing problem in a reasonable way that is accessible and makes bigger progress than has been made to date without incurring the wrath of the ECB or the European Union in terms of state aid?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

The challenges with regard to housing in particular are very real, especially for younger people. Underpinning this is the continued imbalance between the demand for places to live and the supply of places to live, whether to own or to rent. We see this in house prices and rents increasing very quickly. This points to the underlying imbalance between demand and supply for housing.

In the context of ability to access mortgages, we have the mortgage rules that have been in place. They have been particularly important in ensuring we do not have another feedback loop between credit and house prices, which could make things worse both for those trying to enter the housing market but also for the economy as a whole. This has been a key policy measure we have had for the past seven years. We did an in-depth review of these measures, which concluded last year, and we made some very targeted amendments because we very much recognise they entail significant benefits for the economy as a whole but they also entail costs. We always balance the costs and benefits of our policy interventions. They are very important to make sure we have sustainable lending standards and we do not have adverse feedback loops between credit and house prices and ultimately we do not end up in a situation where we might have housing supply that is based on unsustainable lending standards and then collapses again. No one in this country wants that. That does mean that, in the context of what we are seeing at the moment of increasing costs of construction, there are potential issues around constraints in the supply of housing. The solution to these issues is to focus very much on different dimensions of housing supply. My colleagues might have something to add to this.

Dr. Robert Kelly

I will add one point. I completely agree with everything Mr. Madouros said. The real issue here is the imbalance between housing supply and housing demand. Looking at the current public expenditure on housing, Ireland is among the top across the EU comparators. It is not necessarily about spending more money; it is about the integrated solution of all elements to create that supply. Right now, we do not spend fully the capital budget put towards housing. There are issues, potentially, in terms of the supply and rising costs, but it is integrating everything from planning to costs to scale to productivity to technological advancements. It will have to be a suite of measures to try to close that gap between what is needed, and it is not just what is needed this year or last year. It is a cumulation of multiple years now where we simply have not supplied enough housing relative to demand.

In the previous session I asked about the 9,000 staff that are being laid off by Amazon, and whether the witnesses believe Ireland's economic forecasts should be revised in light of this announcement? Is there a rough estimate of how many employees in the State might be affected by sad news like this?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I thank the Deputy. I will start at a very high level, in consultation with my colleagues. One thing to say is that Ireland has a particular reliance on the information and communication technologies, ICT, services sector if we compare across different dimensions, whether related to, for example, employment, wages or public finances and tax revenues. We looked at this very closely as part of our last quarterly bulletin. There was a signed article that focused on the impact of recent developments and announcements on the broader economy. Overall, our judgement so far is that the announcements from the perspective of the overall economy and labour market have been relatively small in the context of what is a particularly tight labour market. Of course, it is a very difficult situation for the individuals involved. However it is in the context of a relatively tight labour market overall. Maybe one of my colleagues would like to comment.

Dr. Robert Kelly

I thank the Deputy for her question. First, to build a little on what Mr. Madouros said, we had the signed article in the last quarterly bulletin, and I will give the context of what we are talking about in terms of ICT services. Ireland's employment has grown quite strongly, out of step even with European comparators, since 2018. The ICT services sector has grown at four times that rate to a point that one in 15 people in the State now work in this sector. It is a big employer, so in the context of its growth, at the time we estimated maybe 2,300 people would be affected, but we have also seen announcements - we have seen Amazon and Meta in recent times - so we are waiting to see them come through to ascertain that.

We also conduct market intelligence to try to better understand the nature of these roles. When we talk to these companies, they give the term "support services" as being where a lot of these individuals work rather than in their core business. We see a positive there because support services potentially are more transferable across sectors. When we look more broadly in the economy, there is a clear demand for labour that cannot be met by the supplier right now. Over the past decade we have seen that imbalance between supply and demand continue to tighten. Pre-pandemic we thought we were close to full capacity. It has halved again to the point that, pre-pandemic, their unemployment to vacancy rate was 6:1 and it is now 3:1. I fully appreciate that we are seeing a correction within the sector, but looking at the broader labour market in Ireland, it is very tight, and if these individuals have transferable skills, they will likely find roles very quickly in the broader labour market.

I thank Dr. Kelly. I noted that the European Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs yesterday discussed the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and its implications for Europe. Will the witnesses give a brief outline of how this banking failure differs from 2008, and will we see banks fail on this side of the water? We have already seen the collapse of Credit Suisse.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

Silicon Valley Bank was a very particular and extreme case across different dimensions. I am happy to go through the detail if the Deputy wants but it had a combination of characteristics that made it particularly vulnerable and which are not evident in the Irish banking system or, more broadly, in the euro area banking system. That is in terms of the characteristics of the bank but there is also an important dimension about the overall regulatory framework. In the US, the way in which some of the internationally agreed standards are applied and the approach to regulation supervision differs depending on the types of institutions. Silicon Valley Bank was one of the institutions that was a medium-sized, regional bank that was not subject to the full Basel III prudential internationally agreed standards and not subject to annual stress tests, so there were somewhat different requirements, whereas in Europe, including in Ireland, the same standards are applied across the board, whether it is a larger or smaller bank.

To go back to the Deputy's main point and my opening statement, the banking system is resilient to a range of potential adverse shocks, and that can be seen in many different ways. There is bank capital, liquidity and lending standards, to go back to the previous conversation about mortgage rules being much more prudent. Of course, as would be expected, when external shocks hit, and we did it with Brexit, with Covid-19, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we reorient our efforts at the Central Bank to assess the implications of these. We also engage very closely from a supervisory perspective with financial market participants to ensure they themselves are assessing the impact of these developments and managing any risks. That is what we are doing now in close co-operation with our international counterparts and at a domestic level under the auspices of the financial stability group. We will continue to do that and to remain vigilant.

Will the witnesses please outline in detail what physical supports they would recommend to protect the most vulnerable? I mention targeted, temporary and tailored, but what examples could they give me?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

My colleagues may want to come in but the specific, individual interventions are more from the perspective of the Government to consider. Our advice is more from a macroeconomic perspective. It is very much focused on targeted supports because this shock has had particularly adverse implications for some parts of the population. It has not been felt in the same way by everyone. It is important that supports are targeted to those who are most vulnerable and who need them most. Supports should be temporary so that they do not end up either adding a permanent vulnerability to the public finances over the medium term or inadvertently add to medium-term inflationary pressures, which would not help anyone because what we are trying to do is bring inflation back down to 2%. They should be tailored too to maintain incentives to preserve energy. Our advice is much more from an overall macroeconomic perspective whereas individual interventions are political matters for Government.

Dr. Robert Kelly

I am happy to add a little bit. Mr. Madouros covered it really well but I would describe it as, very early in the shock, speed being of primary concern when we think about the response. In essence there was a gap to be bridged for households, so broader energy supports, for example, were the right thing then. Now we have to understand the particular cohorts of society. The cost of living has risen. Even though inflation is starting to recede, their cost of living remains elevated. We had a piece two quarterly bulletins ago that identified a cohort of individuals. We looked across Irish society and tried to understand it better. Going into this shock, there were up to 180,000 households with small amounts of liquidity, which is savings in plain language, and, to meet ongoing demands, they had to use essentially all of their income.

They were particularly vulnerable to this shock. What is needed now is more targeting - less around particular energy - to those individual households. That is what will have the biggest effect.

Mr. Madouros touched on this a little bit. I refer to the extent we can have more resilience to future shocks, an example of which is lowering public transport fees. That has dual benefits. We know the individuals who use public transport might be ones who have experienced a higher cost of living but, at the same time, it also helps address some of our climate ambitions.

I thank the witnesses for being here. I appreciate their time very much. I will have to be indulged and allowed to be given the opportunity to ask the same question of these witnesses that I did of the previous witnesses. What does the deputy governor think of the policy of our main pillar banks at a time when they are refusing to support young, hard-working couples who want to start out on life and borrow money? I will expand what I said previously. What about respectable, hard-working people in small business who want to borrow money? We are at a time where there is unprecedented billions on deposit in our pillar banks. We are living through a time when they are driving me mad by putting up their signs that state “We're backing brave”. We know they should have signs up that read: “Do not come in here looking for a loan because we will not give it to you regardless of who you are, what you are, what age you are or what your earning capacity is”; “How hard you are working means nothing because we are going to do nothing for you”; “We will take money from you. We will charge you every type of fee in the world but the one thing we will not do is back you”; “We will not back business” ; “We will not back young people starting out or young couples wanting to build a home”; “We will not back you”. Those are the signs they should be told to put up. That is the advertising they should be doing because that is the truth.

I would like to know whether the deputy governor, the other witnesses and the Central Bank in general will do anything to try to ask these people to do what banks are supposed to do, which is give out money at a rate. We know the rates are extraordinarily high, but at the same time, people want to get going on the property ladder and I appreciate that fully. I am involved in property since I was 19 years of age. I believe that in life there is a certain period when a person is starting where they need to get their act together, they need to get going and they need opportunities. Sometimes, they have to rent for a while and that is fine. However, I do not want to see people who do not want to rent doing so for any day longer than they have to. I want to see them get going on their own feet, get their own two legs under them and start the onerous responsibility of paying a mortgage. However, they are not being given that opportunity. Is there something we can do about that? That is my main question. I am sorry for repeating myself but these people will only be hearing me asking this for the first time. I am interested to know. I want my time to be used by them to say what they can do.

Will they please get “We're backing brave” signs taken down and burned outside the banks so that the banks will act honestly and say they are not backing brave? At every platform I can get, I will repeat "AIB is not backing brave". It is doing no such thing. It did in the past but not in recent years. Those signs are misleading, untrue, deceitful and wronging people.

It is totally valid to ask the same question to another group.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I will start from the middle point, which I agree with. One of the roles of the financial system in society is to intermediate funds from those who want to save towards those who want to borrow. That is one of the key functions of the financial system. However, that function entails risks, and risks also need to be managed. It is important to recognise that sometimes risks can become excessive. If there are excessive risks, that can entail very large costs to society like we saw in the previous financial crisis. That is what I think everyone wants to avoid. I understand the perspective of the importance of intermediating funds to those who want and need to borrow to purchase a home. However, that needs to be done in a managed way.

Returning to what I was saying earlier, the underlying issue in the housing and mortgage market is much more in relation to the supply of housing. The mortgage market has grown in recent years. There have been more mortgages issued. It has been growing at a rate where the lending standards have remained sustainable. However, if the supply of housing is not there, that then basically means we are seeing higher house prices and rents for the economy relative to incomes. In an environment such as that - borrowing more relative to someone’s income - the effect that would have is more money chasing the same number of properties and increasing house prices even further. That is what the mortgage measures are there to try to guard against.

Is Mr. Madouros going to ask AIB to take down the misleading signs that read “We're backing brave”, because they are not?

I think that might be outside the remit of the Central Bank.

The funny thing about it is the Cathaoirleach is very seldom wrong but she is wrong about that and I will tell her why. If I put up a sign in my shop tomorrow morning that states I am giving away cucumbers but I do not have a cucumber inside my shop, that is a misleading sign. If people have signs up saying “We're backing brave” and they are not backing brave, for example, and there are business people and couples saying “Take a chance on me” and the bank is continuously saying “No, no, no”, which is what it is doing, those signs are misleading. What other avenue can we go down to get those signs taken down? I do not want people to be codded, fooled and misled by banks that we bailed out in the first instance.

The only reason the doors are open in AIB and Bank of Ireland is because we kept them open. When I say “we”, I mean the taxpayers and workers of Ireland, the people who put their shoulder to the wheel when the whole thing was in chaos and crisis. It was we who bailed them out. I want to know whether the misleading signs can be taken down. Surely be to God there is a proper prudence and governance when it comes to information. If false information is given out, I want something done. If the deputy governor is saying “No”, I want to him to say he will do nothing about it. Can my grievance at least be taken back to the manager, the CEO and the people at the helm of AIB and for them to be told that I am saying to take their goddamn misleading lies off of their banks?

That is an issue around consumer protection as well. We will put that to the Central Bank.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I apologise as I would not comment on individual institutions generally. The issues around what is happening to the supply of credit are ones that we look at very closely, both for businesses and SMEs as well as households.

On SMEs, one of the key sources of information we have is from the Department of Finance in the context of its credit demand survey. That gives us a sense of whether what we see in terms of credit outcomes is driven mainly by demand factors, that is, low credit demand, or credit supply, which might include, for example, rejections of applications. The overall trend in recent years has been one of relatively and continuously subdued demand for credit by the SME sector.

In the mortgage market we have seen a general increase in recent years of both approvals and mortgage drawdowns. I think there is some material in the quarterly bulletin. Mortgage drawdowns last year were a little more than €10.5 billion. We also have another example of past analysis showing that approvals are consistently higher than drawdowns. Part of the reason is that people get mortgage approvals but are then unable to find a place to purchase because of the limited supply. I think that goes back to some of the underlying issues around the imbalance between supply and demand.

Dr. Robert Kelly

To add to Mr. Madouros's point around that survey in particular, obviously, there are individual firms, or individual credit decisions, which are for institutions. However, when one looks at that broad survey, Ireland has a lot of SMEs that say they can internally fund their own expansion. Maybe it is a reflection of what happened 15 years ago. What is stopping them increasing their investment is the level of certainty they face in the economy and other uncertainty factors, which they will cite. When we see some of the supports introduced in terms of energy, firms talk about how the biggest gain for them would be more certainty about the future outlook. Some of that is uncontrollable, as there are external factors, but that is key in decision-making for their investment, and not necessarily being blocked by a lack of finance. Maybe the Deputy is referring to certain firms that are more in the start-up space, but when we think about that broad across the macro, SMEs are not reporting impediments to finance as the biggest reason they cannot expand. When one looks at their surveys, staff is the biggest issue. More than 40% of them say the biggest impediment to growth is they cannot find staff. I am not saying there are not individual firms, if that is what is being referred to, but looking across the economy finance is certainly not the biggest thing SMEs are citing.

The main point is that people with a track record in business are finding it increasingly difficult to get loans the way they did before. I have already spoken about the young couples who find it impossible to get mortgages. Dr. Kelly talks about how people going for mortgages are getting them. The majority of people who go for mortgages are getting the blanket refusal. They are being refused, and there is no autonomy any more with the banks. When you go the bank, the bank manager may as well be sweeping the floor, because the bank manager has no say whatsoever any more. None whatsoever. In the past you could get an answer from a bank manager. He or she would answer you after a couple of days and tell you they will stand with you and back you and support you. It is now a case of them referring that to Dublin. The people in Dublin do not know you. They do not want to know you. They do not care about you. They do not care if you live or die. They do not care if your business grows, closes, or just stays indifferent, and they are definitely not backing brave. I do not see why the witnesses are all afraid of tackling the issue with the signs. It seems the message must go out from this meeting that the Central Bank does not care about the main pillar banks putting up misleading information. I will tell that story to the public-----

I remind the Deputy that he has named a bank and used certain language - misleading, lies and words like that. I caution him to be careful with his language.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

For what it is worth, consumer and investor protection is a key area from the perspective of the Central Bank. This is not my main area of responsibility either. However, I assure the Deputy that issues around consumer and investor protection, including communication with customers where relevant, across a range of dimensions is high on our agenda and overall priorities. It is part of our core mandate.

Is Deputy Healy-Rae happy with that?

If I see the signs coming down, I will be happy.

I thank the witnesses for appearing before the committee to discuss these topics. It is interesting listening to Deputy Healy-Rae. I have one question on the banking sector. We have the potential to develop the credit union network as another force in banking. How supportive is the Central Bank of achieving that, so we end up with a situation where the credit union movement can operate as another banking force in the country? The fact is that they are probably more customer friendly. They are in the community creating community-type banking to provide an alternative to dealing with retail banks, if there were issues. I agree that during the boom of the mid-2000s a lot was built on credit. When the wheels stopped rolling there was no money for anybody to pay anybody. It was a vicious circle. I believe we need to have prudence and reserves to keep things going, whether one is in a small company, a large company or a bank. What is the attitude of the Central Bank towards supporting or getting the credit unions into a framework where they can generally compete with banks nationally?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

Credit unions are a particularly important segment of the overall financial system with close links to local communities. From our perspective we regulate and supervise them. It is a general statement, and not just specific to credit unions, that well regulated financial institutions end up being more supportive of their customers not just now, but into the future in a sustainable manner. That will continue. I do not have the numbers in front of me in terms of lending capacity. I would need to get them to the Deputy if he needs them. However, there is significant additional capacity for credit unions to lend within the existing requirements.

When Mr. Madouros says that they have the capacity, is the issue that they are not lending or that there is not the demand for loans? Are people being prudent in the uncertain markets we have with inflation and so on? People are standing back to see where we are going to level out after all we have been through between Covid and the Ukraine war. Is there a sense that people are pulling back from expanding, whether in business or otherwise? Are they being cautious at the moment?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I do not know precisely so we might need to come back on that. My sense is that this has been a relatively long-standing trend. I was referring to the fact that I think there are some regulatory requirements for which there is substantial additional capacity for the credit union sector to lend should it need to. We are also entering a new environment that offers opportunities for the sector. That might be the reshaping of the domestically focused financial system, including with the exit of two of the retail banks. We are also in a changing interest rate environment, which potentially offers more practicable opportunities.

Dr. Robert Kelly

It is difficult to get consumer demand especially for personal finance. However, if one looks at something like consumer sentiment, which is a good indicator of the expectations of consumers, we have seen that fall quite dramatically through repeated shocks and high levels of uncertainty. We have seen a turnaround. It is up by about one third since September. I am of the opinion that there are high levels of uncertainty. We know from a long history that once uncertainty is high businesses defer investments and consumers defer big purchases. It will weigh to some extent on the demand for credit.

I will finish on the credit unions. There is the League of Credit Unions but there are also individual entities, wherever they are. In my constituency there is St. Jarlath's Credit Union, which covers Tuam, and there is a large hinterland comprising Athenry, Gort and Galway city. There is also Naomh Breandan Credit Union in Loughrea. They all work as entities on their own. Is that a difficulty for them trying to get regulation in a way they can compete on a mortgage level, for instance?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I am not sure it is so much a regulation issue per se. However, what this means is there are fewer opportunities for what we call economies of scale. If there are a lot of individual smaller institutions it might be more difficult to build efficiencies to build up business.

One issue under active consideration is including co-operation under certain dimensions between some of the individual credit unions to guard against that.

Dr. Robert Kelly

To return to our previous point, they are particularly well-suited, if we feel that the likes of the pillar banks have business models which do not allow for the same level of relationship banking as previously, credit unions, as the witness says, would have local knowledge. If there is this belief that banks on a larger scale cannot price credit accordingly to information which is slightly "softer" and is hard to gather on scale, that creates potential business opportunities for credit unions. They can see through some of the different levels of risk and being based in the local community could give them an avenue to expand.

I have a question on inflation and the effect that can have on Government expenditure, especially in the capital area where we have the national development plan and many projects that we are hoping to do over the next ten years. We might not get the same bang for our buck as we did two years ago with the inflation that has happened. In the next two to three years do the witnesses see inflation coming back to a near normal level? Regarding our income tax receipts and the fact that we have a windfall tax at the moment, how do the witnesses gauge whether that is falling off or when will we see that begin to wane so we can prepare for that? Basically, how many good years do we have left in that market? How do we monitor it to see that it is actually going down? What kind of alerts are in place in this situation? This is something we will need to know before we are over the cliff, that we can accommodate what we are trying to do, especially with all the supports we have put in place since Covid. Some of these supports have been temporary but if a child is given a bag of sweets it is very hard to get him or her to give them back. We are going to have problems trying to wean people off some of the supports they have been getting generally and particularly with the cost-of-living crisis. It is a very loaded question but I would like to get an idea how the witnesses monitor what is happening so that red flags can be raised in advance of something going completely wrong.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I can start with some of the inflation issues and my colleague might pick up some of the other questions. Inflation remains too high. The societal costs for everyone of high and unpredictable inflation are really high. It is for this reason that monetary policy in Europe has been tightened by the European Central Bank's, ECB, governing council. It has raised interest rates to make sure that inflation returns to its 2% medium-term target. Our forecast, which we outlined earlier, is that headline inflation is projected to fall to around 5% this year and then go to around 2.2% by 2025. Effectively, it is gradually returning down. If we look at underlying inflationary dynamics they are still there. Underlying inflation is likely to be more persistent but that is precisely why monetary policy is responding. The worst possible outcome would be if policy action were not taken and inflation were to be ingrained into the overall economy. In that case, to bring it back down to 2% or to its more normal levels would require much more painful policy action. That is the lesson that we collectively learned in the 1980s.

Dr. Robert Kelly

I can take some of the questions on corporation tax. This is consistent with what we are trying to advise. What we are seeing or what we describe as windfall tax essentially depends on the tax planning for a small number of firms. It is not necessarily what one would see as the corporation tax level linked to the growth rate we are seeing in the Irish economy. The first issue is measurement so it is almost impossible to answer the Deputy's first question as to when exactly it might stop. That depends on global value change, for example, and the business models of some multinational operators. It is a complex system which could change for a number of reasons. We perform measurements by looking at the level of growth in the economy using GNI* and we predict what should be the corporation tax level linked to that level of growth. The gap between that and what we realise, we put under it as a windfall tax. While having this windfall tax is a huge gain, it is very important what we do with it next. The real danger here is that it potentially enters into permanent current expenditure. If, as the Deputy has highlighted and we are in agreement on, it was to stop for some reason, we have a problem because current expenditure remains elevated and we would have to try to meet it. However, if for the likes of the reserve fund, it was used to build up and deal with a number of structural issues facing us, it could be a very effective way of building a buffer against issues we need to deal with. These could be housing, ageing demographics and the transition to net zero. How we think about the next step of that is we need to link that towards the capacity within the economy to deliver the various aspects of that. We have an ambitious national development plan and we have a tight labour market. The issue is about understanding how we best use this. We need to measure it well, use it effectively and not end up in the position where it becomes part of current expenditure where it does create vulnerability if there was to be a change.

Mr. Martin O'Brien

As Dr. Kelly mentioned, many of the things that will decide whether this windfall corporation tax stops are completely outside of the control of the domestic authorities. The amount of uncertainty around it is going to persist as long as we have it. It came very quickly, relatively speaking, and the risk is there that it could go away relatively quickly. The diversion of it towards the reserve fund is important.

In relation to the overall costs of the national development plan and investment costs more generally, it is also important, in the context of the longer term challenges we have referred to, that public investment needs to be protected. It has a lot of value and needs to continue. There are things that will require public investment to address some of the challenges we have discussed. In the broad, overarching framework of having sustainable expenditure levels, it is important to note that choices will have to be made between maintaining current expenditures or temporary supports versus actually investing for the future. It is a question of getting the real value of the investment spending into the future and maintaining and protecting that versus some of the current expenditure challenges we are facing. There are definitely choices to be made between investing in infrastructure to address the longer term challenges versus addressing the short term challenges through current expenditure. The balance between the two has to be carefully managed.

There is much food for thought there. There is a lot of nuance here and many challenges for us. I thank the witnesses for their openness and hopefully we will engage with them again.

I want to return to the issue of the labour market which has come up in other contributions. We are at pretty much full employment now and that is challenging for a number of sectors. Which ones do the witnesses think are particularly challenged? Why do the witnesses believe it has happened? We have talked here before about the impacts post Covid of a certain cohort of people leaving the labour market and not returning. In the past 12 months we have seen an increase in profit margins but not necessarily the expected increase in wages that we might have been talking about 12 months prior to this. Can the witnesses comment on this?

Dr. Robert Kelly

I am happy to start and then maybe Dr. O'Brien or Mr. Madouros will comment further. I will bring us back to where we were pre pandemic. As the Cathaoirleach said, we had quite a tight labour market at that stage. What we have seen since is an increase in the demand for labour. What happened as we went into the pandemic was that consumption shifted from a lot of services which were closed because of the restrictions towards consumable goods. That actually moved quite a lot of labour and we have seen quite a lot of movement across sectors, particularly towards ICT services. There was a big increase in that sector through the pandemic. We also saw quite a big increase in participation rates, particularly among the younger cohort but also among females aged from 35 to their mid-50s. I spoke earlier about growth in employment and the increased participation rate allowed the labour market to grow without wages also growing. That is almost like the perfect recipe for growth.

When we look towards the future, there may be some capacity to see further participation rate growth and some potential for growth from migration, but, to be honest, it seems more limited. Therefore, as the labour market tightens and we have a continued demand for labour, wages will start to be affected. Our wage projections are up compared with where they were late last year. Most sectors have recovered and are now back to where they were pre pandemic. Overall, employment levels are well above what they were but areas like accommodation and services still have labour shortages. In terms of the point I made earlier about investment, when we talk to firms about growth, the main impediments they reference are finding labour and finding somewhere for that labour to live. When we talk to firms we find there is a big drive vis-à-vis accommodation. They are renting parts of hotels, for example, and thinking about ways to provide accommodation. It really is a challenge for growth in the context of labour. Increased participation in the labour market comes with a housing demand.

Dr. Martin O'Brien

I can talk a little about profit margins. The Cathaoirleach is correct that measuring this is quite difficult. We look at the GDP deflator to try to understand the relativity of profits to firms and wages. There is a number of ways of looking at this and there are dynamics that cross the two of them. Potentially what we will see going forward, given that we have seen a small increase in profit margins for firms, is capacity for wages to grow, absent of more cost pressures in terms of inflation. That is the judgment we are trying to make right now. Firms saw a large increase in their input costs and we saw them develop large amounts of inventory because there was uncertainty. We are seeing those inventories wind down now. Firms are starting to see normality in their supply chains. As we look forward, we see that there is scope or potential for limited wage growth to catch up without causing inflationary pressures. Of course, that is exactly the dynamic we are watching very closely, as is the ECB.

In terms of the wages and profits dimension and the difficulty of actually understanding how these are evolving, some of the shifts in the labour market that Dr. Kelly mentioned, with people moving from one sector to another with the same skills - often moving from a lower-paid sector to a higher-paid one but doing a very similar job - has distorted an awful lot of the numbers that we are looking at as we try to figure out how wages have grown. When we try to look through that, we might look at a person who has been working in the same job and doing the same number of hours from before the pandemic to now and we see that his or her wages have grown quite healthily, perhaps more so than what we see in some of the averages or some of the headline numbers that are published in this regard. It is only now when we are past the period of having the wage supports and all of the things that were influencing some of the headline numbers that we are actually getting a little bit of a truer sense of underlying wage growth. All of the demand and supply factors are ultimately going to drive wage rates through this year in particular. I would just add that caveat that when we are looking back at some of the headline numbers published by the CSO on wages, they do not necessarily capture the full story of all of the underlying dynamics in the labour market.

I have a quick question on the National Reserve Fund, NRF. Would our guests expect to see the Department of Finance, or whoever might be tasked with the role, to remake the limits of that fund at some stage, as in, the fact that it has a limit that is set out in a very specific way? Are we looking, in the immediate future, at a rewriting of how that fund is set out?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

Maybe at a very high level I can explain a little bit of what I said in my remarks. This goes to the issue of excess corporation tax receipts or the fact that the corporation tax receipts are not necessarily linked to domestic economic activity. As Dr. Kelly was saying earlier, the risk with these is that they are very volatile. They might be here today but there is a risk that they might not be here tomorrow. In that context, it is important that they are not used to fund permanent expenditure because if that were the case, it could create an underlying structural vulnerability. We very much welcome the NRF although it is approaching its legislative limits.

That is my question. In a practical sense, are we going to have to reorganise it?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

Yes, there is a question around whether the limit is raised and around the overall use of the fund. Perhaps Dr. Kelly would like to answer that.

Dr. Robert Kelly

Given the size of the excess corporation tax receipts, estimated to be up to €10 billion, it is likely that we will reach that legislative limit of €8 billion quite quickly, so it makes sense to review the fund and how it is used. It is also important to bear in mind that there are a number of pressures that we need to address. To go back to our earlier discussion on the labour market, it will be an important balance between addressing some of those pressures and others like the age demographic. The latter would have less labour market demands but the creation of some type of national pension reserve fund would be a way of addressing some of those future demands or pressures. It is about finding a balance but I suspect that in its current form and given what we have seen in terms of corporation tax, we will reach that €8 billion limit soon.

Yes, very soon. Will we reach it in the next two years?

Dr. Robert Kelly

Yes, or even less. There is €6 billion already in it.

The witnesses mentioned our debt and that we are in a relatively secure position up to 2025 because of the way it is structured. Post 2025, a number of layers of our debt will come to fruition. Do our guests know if the work in this regard has started, particularly as 2025 is not too far away? This committee is tasked with looking at the medium to long term, so this falls within our remit. Are we looking at what will happen when some of that debt matures, the situation changes and we are in a different environment?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

The reason we are focusing on the numbers is that our projections are short- to medium-term, up to 2025. As the Cathaoirleach rightly mentions and as we were saying earlier, there are medium-term structural challenges for the economy. Indeed, some of them are not medium-term but are very immediate, like housing. The Cathaoirleach's point about looking further ahead is really important. It is about having sustainable growth and frameworks into the future, not just now. This links to some of the points made in the report of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare regarding broadening the tax base.

Dr. Robert Kelly

When I think about debt sustainability, the question is how much debt the output is carrying. A couple of factors between now and 2025, such as projected surpluses, for example, indicate quite favourable growth dynamics relative to the cost of debt, which, to be honest, sees the debt fall quite considerably. When we think about the longer term, it is not necessarily a question of when the debt matures, and I will talk about that in a moment, but whether we have used this period to create more sustainability in the public finances and whether we have gotten to a place where we are running surpluses so it becomes less of an issue to roll over debt or we are rolling over less of a stock of debt.

To be fair, the NTMA has used the period of low rates to change the maturity of that debt profile and build quite substantial cash balances. There is flexibility for the State from a liquidity point of view in relation to individual bonds. We can carefully manage how we roll over elements of the debt and how we enter markets. This comes back to the point about how the excess or windfall corporation tax receipts are used. They need to be used in a way that does not enter current expenditure. That is where the danger lies, that we get to this later period but we have not used the surpluses in a way that makes them available to roll down our level of debt and make it more sustainable on a medium-term to long-term basis.

Dr. Martin O'Brien

Dr. Kelly mentioned the sheer dynamics of how one evaluates sustainability, such as running surpluses or having growth higher than the interest rate. On the running of surpluses, it certainly would be a challenge to run surpluses if some of the supports we have had to introduce - appropriately introduced given the shocks we have had through Covid and with the energy crisis - were to become permanent or quasi-permanent in any form. It would be much more challenging to run those surpluses unless they were sustainably funded over a longer term. A key part of maintaining that broadly favourable outlook towards 2025 and the sustainability beyond that 2025 horizon is going to be how we take the choices and how the choices are made around managing those temporary supports to ensuring they are actually temporary.

It has been a very useful conversation. There is one aspect I wish to refer to that relates to the construction industry and the building of houses, given that the building of houses is absolutely necessary. The annual house building rates are way beyond anything we have achieved so far. Is it true that the construction sector, developers and builders, are relying on investment funds to fund their operations? What happens afterwards? Is it at the same interest rates that are available in the pillar banks or are they at a punitive rate?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

Funding is probably a mix of sources. Some of the debt financing might be coming from the pillar banks. We know that an increasing proportion of debt financing is coming from the non-bank specialist lenders that operate here. Of course, then there are the investment funds which are more equity-based financing, or perhaps an investment fund model that supports the construction activity and ultimately owns it and then rents it out, for example, an apartment block. Investment funds themselves might have borrowing from international investors as well as domestic lenders. I would say it is a mix. It is quite difficult to have a very complete picture because there is such a diversity in there. This is an area into which we are looking more, including the diversity and the mix of funding.

Dr. Robert Kelly

That covered it really well. There are different types of construction happening. There are very big construction companies within the State, for example, that would have to be listed on the exchanges. They would have their own equity. Their funding model is very different. They would have land and they would have it planned out over a number of years. Then there are the cohort of builders who are doing phased building on a much smaller scale. These are what we would consider as the traditional small and medium-sized enterprises. How they would fund themselves is considerably different from the larger providers of homes in the State. They would have a mix including bank debt and non-bank debt. We have published some data on this and how it has evolved over time. It is very much reflective. There is also the private rental sector, PRS, model where they go from start to end with a view to renting it. In considering the supply, there is a mix in terms of who is supplying it and the business model being used, and the funding then reflects that.

I just wonder how the Central Bank can control, oversee and influence what is happening in that area if a combination of lenders are involved and given they may be affected in one way or another by actions or by developments in the industry outside the jurisdiction.

This whole housing issue is a national emergency. We need to do something in a very great hurry. As Deputy Healy-Rae has said, it has to be affordable and it has to be within the reach of the people. In the last session, reference was made to countless schemes being available that are very helpful. It is true that one or two of them are helpful, but there are other schemes available that do not work and never did work. My office deals with a lot of housing applicants and there are problems that come up regularly. A person may qualify for X to solve their housing problem but is told he or she can only be given Y, which is about 50% of what is needed, because the person may not qualify on aid grounds or whatever and perhaps does not have a sufficient deposit. This is a problem and they are not isolated cases. These issues happen quite regularly. People are crying out for assistance and I do not know where it is going to come from. I must emphasise that, like Deputy Healy-Rae, my office deals with a lot of applicants so we would have a good general knowledge of how the system is working or is not working at all. Perhaps some means could be found to introduce sufficient schemes, co-ordinated or whatever, to ensure the public can gain access to much-needed mortgages for their homes. If people turn off as they seek to rely on the traditional institutions, they will leave the country. That is the problem.

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I will just respond to a couple of things. On the funding of construction activities, as Dr. Kelly has said, it is from different sources and this makes it more difficult to get an overall picture. We have the building blocks and that is an area on which we continue to focus, so we would have better information on bank lending. We have been building information, as Dr. Kelly mentioned, on non-bank lending and publishing some of these things. We have been building up our information on investment fund activities and property funds. This is an area where we are trying to go at it through different lenses, given the complexities, to build an overall better picture.

On the issue of the challenges in the housing market, I very much agree. As the Deputy will know, there are a number of Government schemes to support potential new mortgagors. There is one point I will just come back to, which is that the underlying issue is around supply of housing and the cost of the supply of housing.

Has anybody envisaged what might happen in the event of there being a really accelerated house building programme and the effect that might have, or is feared to have, on the value of houses already sold or available for sale, which are the new building schemes? For instance, if a builder or developer has a scheme of houses built and the national urgency is to provide more houses, that must affect the value of the houses that are there already.

Dr. Martin O'Brien

I am not aware of any particular study that has been set on that. The point made by Dr. Kelly earlier was that we are basically facing into a situation where we have almost a decade, if not more, of relative undersupply given demand levels. I would suggest we would have to see an astronomical and unfeasible increase in output to get the kind of issues Deputy Durkan has mentioned. Notwithstanding this, the challenges are there, such as increasing the supply being the most fundamental issue, as mentioned by Mr. Madouros. That may, it is hoped, make housing more affordable for more people over the longer term, but that would not suggest it would have a detrimental impact in bringing housing values below a certain level or causing significant collapse or anything like that in the context of overall housing values and given the strength of underlying demand that is there.

I have one last question, Chair.

It must really be one last question, Deputy. I will hold you to this.

I am going to go straight home after this.

I am aware of quite a number of housing developments all over the region that are completed for the last six months and are ready for occupation. Why are they not being occupied?

Mr. Vasileios Madouros

I am sorry but that is not an area we could answer on.

Is that okay with the Deputy?

I will finish with that one because I have a question down this week to ascertain where those developments are going and what we are waiting for, so we will see. I will know the answer tomorrow, please God. I thank the Chair for allowing me to interject so often and our visitors for their patient replies.

I also thank the officials. I apologise again for holding them longer than we were intending to, but the votes set us off course, unfortunately. That concludes the session. I thank the officials for attending and for staying so late.

The select committee adjourned at 9.01 p.m., sine die.
Top
Share