Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 (Section 4(2)) (Scheme Termination Date) Order 2025: Motion

Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (Deputy Norma Foley)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the following Order in draft:

Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 (Section 4(2)) (Scheme Termination Date) Order 2025,

a copy of which was laid in draft form before Dáil Éireann on the 6th March, 2025.

I thank the Members of Dáil Éireann for making time today to discuss this motion concerning the order I propose to make to extend the termination date of the financial contributions scheme for hosts of temporary protection beneficiaries from Ukraine known as the accommodation recognition payment, ARP, scheme. The extension of the scheme is the only item for consideration today.

The scheme was introduced in July 2022 in response to the outpouring of support from the Irish public, who opened their homes to provide shelter to Ukrainians seeking protection in Ireland. It involves a tax-free monthly payment of €800 per property used to accommodate beneficiaries of temporary protection, irrespective of whether the property is vacant or shared with the host. The rate, originally set at €400, was doubled to €800 from 1 December 2022, following a Government decision. This coincided with the offer a home scheme launched by the Minister for Housing and run by local authorities in conjunction with the Local Government Management Agency. That scheme has been invaluable in making homes, mainly holiday homes, available for beneficiaries of temporary protection. To date, there have been almost 3,400 properties allocated under the offer a home scheme to accommodate more than 10,340 beneficiaries. The ARP monthly rate is not linked to the costs incurred by the person providing accommodation. It is intended, rather, to recognise the valuable contribution of those who host beneficiaries. I acknowledge the absolute generosity of people who have pledged accommodation and who have opened their homes and hearts to displaced people from Ukraine. I also acknowledge the great work of the Irish Red Cross and its partners in matching beneficiaries to pledgers and in supporting them.

A 2024 report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies on private hosting arrangements for displaced Ukrainians in a number of European countries acknowledged the role of financial support packages, such as the ARP, in enabling the hosting period to extend. It should be noted that the ARP scheme does not apply where there is a rental agreement in place and it is not intended to substitute rent.

To date, almost €272 million has been paid to almost 23,000 applicants hosting over 52,000 beneficiaries. Some 37,600 Ukrainians are currently in over 20,000 properties under the scheme. There has been consistent growth in the scheme over time and that growth continues even though the future of the scheme has been uncertain. The scheme is due to end on 31 March 2025 but may be extended by ministerial order subject to Oireachtas approval.

As the temporary protection directive has been to extended March 2026, I propose to make an order to extend the scheme to mirror that extension and provide certainty to those living in hosted arrangements. This scheme is not only a means of recognising the part played by hosts. It has been instrumental in supporting Ukrainians to integrate within local communities nationwide. It has been pivotal in diverting Ukrainian individuals and families away from State-contracted accommodation, which is often in hotels and guesthouses. The scheme is also far more cost-effective for the Exchequer. The average cost of the accommodation recognition payment per person per night is €13, compared with an average of €45 in commercial self-catering accommodation.

The scheme has allowed the Department to move away from a total reliance on tourism and hospitality settings and has enabled us to consolidate our contracted accommodation portfolio. As numbers in hosted accommodation have increased, the numbers in State accommodation have contracted or fallen from a high of more than 58,600 at the end of 2023, to just over 25,800 at present. As a result, the number of beneficiaries in hosted accommodation now exceeds those in contracted accommodation.

I sincerely acknowledge the concerns expressed on the potential impact of the scheme on the private rental market. I accept that it is likely, particularly in some rural areas, that €800 per month tax free may have been more beneficial to an owner than to make the property available on the rental market. However, as those who attended the recent Irish Red Cross briefing in Leinster House will be aware, its survey found that the vast majority of hosts - 91% - are not landlords. They have never been registered with the RTB and they do not wish to become landlords. For many, their primary motivation has been solidarity with Ukraine. Rather than interfering with the rental market, the scheme has been responsible for introducing a stream of accommodation that would not otherwise have been available, a view expressed by a number of support organisations in recent submissions seeking an extension to the scheme. That being said, I am cognisant of Deputies' concerns and have recently met with Government colleagues to consider this scheme. Some of my current functions will shortly transfer to the Minister for Justice. I know he will continue to work as part of the whole-of-government response to the Ukraine war, with a focus on providing access to emergency temporary accommodation to those fleeing the Ukraine conflict who request it, in line with Government policy. The ARP scheme will be included in the transfer of functions. Should the scheme's extension be approved by the Oireachtas, further consideration will be given on operational improvements to the scheme. The future of the scheme will also need to be reviewed in the wider context of considering what comes after the temporary protection directive. While the scheme is not without issues, to not extend it would risk placing significant pressures on an already strained private rental market. The potential loss of hosted accommodation risks displacing some 37,000 beneficiaries, many of whom would be forced to compete in the private rental market. Humanitarian hosting, facilitated by the ARP scheme, represents a sustainable community driven response that is built on the principle of dignity. It goes beyond simply providing shelter and basic needs. It offers respect, compassion and a sense of belonging. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the huge wave of solidarity across the country in response to the war in Ukraine, and indeed in meeting accommodation needs of Ukrainians whether in commercial or hosted settings. In addition, local communities have actively supported families in integrating through access to employment and education.

With specific regard to today's proposal, Part 2 of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 introduced the scheme with a termination date of 31 March 2023. That date reflected the duration of temporary protection under the 2001 Council directive. The directive has subsequently been extended a number of times, and each time the accommodation recognition payment has been extended to mirror these extensions. In a continued spirit of unity and support for the Ukrainian Government and its citizens, the European Commission has extended temporary protection until March 2026. I believe it is therefore appropriate to make an order to extend the accommodation recognition payment scheme termination date to the end of March 2026. Section 42 of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 enables me to make such a change to a date considered appropriate following consultation with the Minister for Social Protection and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. I confirm to Dáil Éireann that I have undertaken those consultations and that both Ministers support the scheme extension. In wishing to extend the scheme, I was also mindful of the need to continue making provision for a financial contribution to assist in maintaining the availability of accommodation for beneficiaries of temporary protection. I want to be clear, however, that the order I propose today is only to extend the scheme as it is for a further year. It is only to extend the scheme and nothing else. I advise Members of this House that it is intended to reduce the monthly ARP from €800 to €600 from June 2025 with the first reduced amount payable in July. That decision has been made following consultation with, and agreement by, the relevant Ministers. Such a reduction seeks to address concerns voiced in the Oireachtas and in other forums on the possibility of a displacement effect ARP is having on the private rental market. It is also a means of winding down the scheme in an orderly and gradual way with due regard for all those involved. That matter will be taken forward by the Minister for Justice, following the transfer of functions. The Act of 2022 required a draft order to be laid before and approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas. Approval of today's motion in Dáil Éireann is essential to ensure the continuation of the scheme beyond March 2025. The motion will also be taken to the Seanad tomorrow. The accommodation recognition payment scheme has been an effective instrument of public policy which we cannot afford to abruptly lose. Approval of this motion today will provide certainty to all involved in hosting arrangements.

Deputy Matt Carthy

I move amendment No. 1:

To insert the following after "6th March, 2025":

": provided that this Order shall take effect only after the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 has been amended to provide for the Accommodation Recognition Payment (ARP) scheme termination date to be extended, only for the following:

— existing recipients with respect to the beneficiaries of temporary protection currently benefitting from the scheme, where those beneficiaries of temporary protection have satisfied a means test, similar to those applicable for other housing assistance payments;

— new applications who propose to host a beneficiary of temporary protection in their property, which is also their own primary residence, and who have not availed of the Rent-a-Room Relief scheme in the previous 12 months, ensuring that the ARP does not further distort the rental sector; and

— recipients who are not in receipt of any additional or 'top-up' payments from a beneficiary of temporary protection.".

I move the amendment mar, tá an scéim cóiríochta seo éagórach. Tá sé ag cruthú fadhbanna sa mhargadh cíosa. Theip ar an Rialtas aghaidh a thabhairt ar na fadhbanna seo agus, mar sin, ligfidh Sinn Féin amach inniu cad iad na hathruithe atá le déanamh. Sinn Féin has repeatedly raised its concerns about the Ukrainian accommodation recognition payment, both in relation to the unfairness inherent in the scheme and the impact that the scheme has on the private rental sector. Last year when there was a similar motion before the Dáil, Sinn Féin also put down an amendment to give the Government the opportunity to address those issues with the scheme. Unfortunately, in typical fashion the Government pushed ahead with the scheme as it was despite growing reports, even at that time, about the adverse impact it was having on the rental sector. Now, at the eleventh hour, days before the scheme is due to expire it brings forward another motion with just one hour of debate, which is quite scandalous, without addressing the serious flaws within the ARP. The truth is that the ARP is divisive, deeply unfair and it has to be ended in its current guise. The motion should only be passed, therefore, if the Sinn Féin amendment is passed because we cannot allow the current situation to continue.

At the beginning, it has to be recognised that this scheme was brought forward as an emergency measure to support those who opened up their homes to people fleeing war, and Sinn Féin commended all of those who opened their homes. However, we are now increasingly seeing that landlords in the private rental sector are availing of the ARP because in many areas it is financially advantageous for them to do so compared with renting to other potential tenants. They are guaranteed a lump sum monthly payment from the Government. They can get top-up payments from beneficiaries that are totally unregulated and have none of the obligations accrued that they would have for any other tenant. That puts other renters, including people who might be on lower incomes, at a severe disadvantage as the scheme incentivises landlords to rent their properties to Ukrainians, particularly in areas where rents would traditionally have been lower. Nothing encapsulates the haphazard approach of the Government than the actual rates. The accommodation recognition payment was originally paid at a rate of €400 per month. Then Government increased it to €800 per month but now it has been reduced to €600, so the approach has been confused, chaotic and uninformed by any analysis whatsoever of the impact on the rental sector. There are serious questions about the use of taxpayers' money on the scheme and why the payment was increased to €800 in December 2022. I hope the Minister will confirm today that she plans to carry out an assessment of the money spent on the scheme to date, because if she now believes the payment can be reduced to €600, people will rightly ask if there was ever any justification for having paid a rate of €800 per month since December 2022.

Until now there has been absolutely no acknowledgement from the Government of the impact of this scheme on the rental sector.

Last week, the Minister, Deputy Foley, confirmed to me in a reply to a parliamentary question that she had not sought any briefings, reports or analysis on the impact of the ARP on the rental sector and, apparently, is relying on a survey which was taken voluntarily instead. Given that this issue was repeatedly raised by myself and others, it is totally unacceptable no analysis of the impact of the ARP was carried out. In the same reply, the Minister stated categorically that the ARP was not interfering with the rental market, despite confirming she had no way of actually making that assertion. We are now told the Government believes a cut of €200 will reduce the potential impact on the rental market. Which is it? It is either impacting it or it is not.

The fundamental unfairness with the scheme, however, is the lack of means testing. There is no other housing assistance payment where the beneficiary does not have to satisfy a means test. A Ukrainian person housed under the ARP could be employed in a well-paid job, working alongside other people from anywhere else in the world, including Ireland, who have an equal need for housing but only one gets access to this unique support and the others do not. That is exactly the type of unfairness that winds people up and creates the tensions that, quite frankly, we could do without. It is putting other renters, including people who might be on lower incomes, at a severe disadvantage as the scheme incentives landlords to rent their properties under this scheme, particularly in areas with traditionally lower rents.

To compound problems, the Minister also acknowledged to me that her Department is aware that some of those who are receiving the ARP are also receiving top-up payments. The feedback I have received, including from landlords, is that this practice is, in fact, widespread and is further distorting the rental sector. The Minister shrugs her shoulders, says the legislation is silent on the matter and suggests it is a matter between the parties concerned. If top ups are not banned, the proposed rate reduction will not make any difference to the fundamental problems with the scheme.

Sinn Féin does not want any cliff edge that would put anyone at risk of homelessness. That is why we have been calling on the Government to address these issues since the last extension and why I have been calling on the Ministers to bring forward the proposed changes that are needed since January. We have always recognised - and it is important we say this clearly - that there is an important distinction to be made between those who are hosting families in their own homes and landlords in the private sector who are availing of the accommodation recognition payment. The Government needs to also recognise this because change is absolutely needed if the ARP is to be renewed for another year. I am asking all TDs today to support the Sinn Féin amendment to the motion before the House to only extend this scheme if the Government commits to, first, end the distortion of the private market by limiting new entrants to the ARP to primary residents - in other words, people hosting in their own homes; second, ensure there is an introduction of a means test for beneficiaries of temporary protection seeking to be housed under the ARP; and third, and importantly, banning the practice of top-up payments within this scheme. If the Government does not accept the Sinn Féin amendment, this House will have no option but to vote against the motion because we cannot stand over the current unfair scheme.

Deputy Mark Wall

Ireland has been a place of safe refuge, as the Minister said, for nearly 40,000 Ukrainians out of the total number from that war-torn country who have come to our shore seeking safety. That is across, as the Minister also said, almost 20,000 active claims for the accommodation recognition payment. While I acknowledge the scheme has worked well in many respects, there are a few issues over the length of time it has been in place. I welcome the news that the Minister plans to extend the scheme for another year into 2026. However, the Labour Party does not support the Government’s plans to reduce the payment by a quarter from €800 to €600, albeit from June 2025. It is the Labour Party’s view that by reducing the payment, the Government is putting Ukrainians at a serious risk of homelessness, which will lead to increased pressure on the private market and a worsening of the housing crisis this country is currently experiencing. This is clearly supported by the findings of an Irish Red Cross survey. Only 9% of properties in the survey were previously registered with the RTB. There would, therefore, be no freeing up of accommodation to the market. Some 86% of hosts reported that their ARP payment is important for them to continue their hosting arrangements. This would suggest that nearly 30,000 Ukrainian refugees face the risk of homelessness if the scheme was removed.

The payment is also far cheaper than the alternative of emergency accommodation, which is effectively where many of these Ukrainians may end up. The Irish Red Cross survey suggests that the State could save between €1 billion and €2 billion every day based on the current numbers. This would unduly take a lot of pressure off the private rental market.

The payment has also played a huge role in helping many Ukrainians integrate into their local community, which is always important in a host country. Some 83% of hosts agree they have played a role in helping their Ukrainian guests integrate into Irish society, while 70% of hosts think their guests have successively integrated within their local community. This is further supported by the fact that many Ukrainians are also working and adding to the Irish economy. Since 2022, there are nearly 24,000 Ukrainians at work and more than 17,000 children at school. That is an important figure for many of our schools, particularly for our rural schools where school numbers have been boosted by the welcome inclusion of Ukrainian children, thus ensuring that many of these rural schools continue to be the heartbeat of our rural communities. These are important figures we need to consider when debating this motion. We cannot ignore the fact that for many of these people, the return to their home country may be a long way away. While I hope there is a ceasefire soon that will lead to long-lasting peace in the region, a lot of work is needed to rebuild Ukraine. For the reasons outlined, the Labour Party cannot support the motion.

Deputy Gary Gannon

For many of the reasons outlined, the Social Democrats will not be able to support the reduction in the accommodation payment for Ukrainians. When the invasion began more than two years ago, Irish people on the whole were incredible in how they answered the call. Many opened up their homes and, in doing so, found friends and members of the community who have come in have contributed and made a huge sense of place in our communities, cities, towns and villages.

I understand there have been some comments - not so much objections but rather remarks - made as to whether there is an unfairness built into the scheme and whether it creates a two-tiered system within Ireland. The survey carried out by the Irish Red Cross demonstrated very well that 91% of the accommodation taken up by Ukrainians availing of the accommodation payment was never in the RTB. That survey demonstrates perfectly that this payment has been a huge value and addition to those who have been able to avail of it. It has been a model which can be replicated. It has fostered a sense of cohesion among the Ukrainian community who have come here. If we took it away, we would at this moment in time be in a more dangerous place than we are. We would have people going into the private rental sector. We know that is not a viable solution, nor is going into the IPAS system. As it stands, and given that the temporary directive has another year left, why would we want to take that away now? We do not have any evidence, studies or research. While different anecdotal positions have been shared, the actual evidence suggests this is a payment that works. This is a payment for the Ukrainian community who have come here and which has enabled them to establish themselves and have a presence. They have been given rooms by people who were never before involved in the RTB, but who have given them a place. That is what the evidence suggests.

Initially, there was a degree of unfairness built into the scheme because the payment was the exact same whether it was a single person or a family living in the home. We all know the costs of electricity and bills have been soaring. For those families who have taken in people, they are going to be feeling that. Having this payment for as long as the temporary directive remains in place actually provides a degree of certainty. I do not doubt for a second that there are decisions to be taken over the horizon, and I believe the Government has a job of work to do to be very clear as to what happens once the temporary directive comes to its conclusion, but for the moment, why upset the balance of things? The Irish Red Cross survey demonstrates clearly that this is a payment that works; that the majority of host families have said they benefit from it; and, more importantly, that they benefit from the people who are in their homes. I do not know what the reduction in the payment from €800 to €600 will actually mean for the host family. Does that mean the electricity bill might just be a little bit too much that month? We are at a point in time now where there is a delicate balance that needs to be protected. If we are to make changes, the changes should be done with evidence and compassion for the betterment of the communities who have come here.

There are, of course, decisions to be taken but they certainly do not need to be taken at this moment. The position of the Social Democrats would very much be that we should maintain what we have. We are open to common-sense suggestions and compassion-based adaptations. However, at the moment, if it is just based on anecdotal suggestions, that is not something that leaves anybody in any particular position of strength.

The Irish people have shown great solidarity with the Ukrainian refugees who have come here. More to the point, communities have been enhanced by them. Until the temporary directive comes to an end in 12 months, we need to give certainty to the communities as to what is the next step. That is a little bit under 12 months away, so let us just keep things as they are. By all means after that, let us provide common-sense solutions and let us build compassion into what we propose next. The war is still raging and the reasons for people seeking sanctuary here are exactly the same. We all hope and pray that a ceasefire will come over the horizon but until that time, why would we rock the boat and remove the accommodation payment from a group of people who have found a sense of place in homes that have benefitted from it? Study, research and analysis and compassion are needed. None of that happens overnight. Let us keep things as they are at the moment, understand what comes next and be clear and give proper information to people who are going to depend on it. Twelve months is not a particularly long period of time for families who have found a home here and are wondering what happens next. For the moment, the Social Democrats advocate that we maintain things as they are.

Deputy Roderic O'Gorman

I welcome the fact that this motion has been brought to the House today. Its passage will bring clarity and certainty to the 37,000 Ukrainians who are currently in homes supported by the accommodation recognition payment, ARP, and the thousands of Irish people who have provided them with accommodation. It is worth recalling that the ARP was conceived at a time of extreme crisis, when thousands of people were arriving in Dublin Airport every week, including men, women, children, the elderly and people with disabilities. All of them needed a place to stay that night and for the months and years that followed. At that time, every single lever available needed to be pulled and pulled rapidly.

Deputies will no doubt recall the pledge process. It did not immediately get off the ground smoothly. During that extreme crisis period, the administrative challenges were immense. However, the State recognised that there was a readily available supply of spare rooms, holiday homes and granny flats, the vast majority of which would not normally be part of rental supply, nor would they ever be. The State knew that we could, and should, activate this to provide the critical emergency shelter. Now, largely thanks to the ARP, pledged accommodation accounts for the largest cohort of Ukrainian accommodation in the country. Some 37,000 people still reside in ARP-supported homes. This is by some degree the most successful example of this type of scheme in Europe. It is actually held up as an exemplar by the International Red Cross.

As Minister at the time overseeing the needs of Ukrainians fleeing the war, I recall meeting the Scottish Government Minister tasked with deploying Scotland's version of the pledged-homes process. They had enormous difficulties setting up their version of the scheme, known as Homes for Ukraine. Ultimately, Scotland ended up hosting a far smaller number of people than we were able to achieve. We quite simply could not have provided the humanitarian operation that we did as a country without the ARP.

There was always going to be a time when the ARP would need to be tailed off and the Government is beginning that process today. Now that today's decision has been made, the most critical thing the Government needs to do is to devise and implement a clear plan for what we do once the temporary protection directive expires in a year's time. That cannot wait until one week before the deadline, as happened in this year's situation. We do not know if the war in Ukraine will be ongoing next year. Even if there is a ceasefire, there may be large parts of the country that remain under occupation. We should be supporting Ukrainians to return home, to begin the work of rebuilding their country, when and where it is safe to do so.

However, it is likely that many Ukrainians will want to stay and we need to provide them with clarity. There needs to be a transition plan. Suggestions that we direct them to the international protection process would be a disaster. That system is already under enormous capacity pressure and is massively overstretched. Obviously, the approach after the temporary protection directive needs to be co-ordinated at EU level. It is clear that many thousands of Ukrainians will receive some form of status in EU countries. We must prepare for that day and we must provide supports to allow those who stay to live and work independently.

Deputy Paul Nicholas Gogarty

I do not have much time but in that very short period, I reiterate my support for this earlier introduction of the ARP. I also commend my former Green Party colleague, Deputy O'Gorman, on his work in this regard. It is hugely important that this scheme continues. I note the Minister said today that all we are doing is extending it for a year and it is not about the wider discussion, so I take that on board. I agree with certain elements of the Sinn Féin amendment. The main thing I want to oppose is a reduction to the €600. That would be counterproductive. In the limited time given to me, I want to reiterate some of the points made by the likes of the Irish Red Cross in relation to this scheme. Some 85% or 86% of hosts reported that the ARP is important for them to keep providing the accommodation because there is a cost to them. More importantly, just 9% of the properties in this scheme were previously available for rent. That is the key point; they would not be there without this scheme, so we should keep it as it is and show solidarity with the people of Ukraine.

Deputy Ken O'Flynn

I have been listening to the debate and it is regrettable that we only have an hour for it, because it is a very important issue. We all admit that there is a crisis in Ukraine and a huge crisis at home. I am reminded of the words of George Orwell in Animal Farm, published in 1945, that "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." The means test has to be introduced. Last week, in this House, the Tánaiste admonished me - I think he thought he was in the Chair - for one simple question I asked. Now we have a situation where I am asking another question. The Tánaiste said on record in this House that most Ukrainians are working and contributing to society and that all the Ukrainians he knows are working. If that is the case, why are we delivering free money? Why are we not means testing? What about the Ukrainians who came here but not from Ukraine? Nobody is asking the hard questions that we ask ordinary Irish citizens and everybody else. If someone comes from a war-torn area of Ukraine, of course, we need to help them. That is our job as human beings. However, if someone has come from Italy, say, having lived there for a number of years and is now availing of the schemes in Ireland, that is completely wrong. Nobody is asking those questions. They are simple questions that we would expect everybody to answer. It is great to see that we €800 available for the ARP, but where is the €800 for the 15,000 Irish people, including 4,000 children who are homeless and on the streets tonight? We have to be fair. The disparity is being brought about by the Government. I am generally fond of the Minister and I think she is a good Minister but the disparity that was introduced by the previous Government and that is being continued by this one is not acceptable. We have to means test people. It is only right that everybody is treated equally. If everyone is treated equally, that means that everybody should be means tested.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I wish the Minister the best of luck in her role. I agree 100% with my colleague, Deputy O'Flynn. People in this country have gone out of their way to help people from Ukraine and it was the right thing to do. People opened up their houses and provided people with rooms, which was fantastic. However, a minority of people have come in, claiming they are from Ukraine. They have bought properties here for over €1 million, while living in accommodation supplied by the Government. We should do our very best for vulnerable people from Ukraine or from any place in the world who we can help if we are able to do so.

I am 100% in favour of that. However, I have a big problem with people who are being put up by the State and who take it to another level. I refer to those who come here and have two or three properties. Irish people cannot find housing for themselves and people coming here from other countries to work cannot get accommodation. People who come into this country and are subsidised by the State must be subject to a means test. If that were the case, we could house people who need accommodation and help those who need funding for housing to access it.

I know many Ukrainian people who have come here and are working. They have integrated into society and have made a life for themselves here. I wish them the best of luck. They are integrated and they are helping society. That is 100% the case. However, a minority of people who come to this country claim they are one thing but their financials show a completely different story. That is not helping the people from Ukraine or anywhere else. Neither is it helping the Irish people. Let us introduce measures to help the vulnerable but also deal with the people who have the funds to help themselves.

Deputy Peadar Tóibín

It is wrong that we have tenants living on the same street who are being treated differently. We should be able to recognise that. It is wrong that people in certain communities receive a financial advantage over others who are in the same accommodation scenarios as they are.

I am aware of a mother, for example, who has three children with autism. They live on the third floor of a block of flats in a town. She is in big trouble - a crisis situation - trying to raise her kids in that scenario. She is on the housing waiting list as she does not have the funds to get a house on the housing market. She does not receive this payment.

I am also aware of a father, who has recently split up from his wife. He recently got permission for his children to go to his accommodation two nights a week. However, he currently lives in emergency accommodation with ten other men. He cannot bring his children into his household at the moment. He is on the housing waiting list but it could be ten years before he gets a house, because he is a single man. He does not receive the payment.

Many people who are currently in very difficult housing situations - in crisis - rightly feel there is a two-tier situation in terms of income and funds from the State for housing accommodation. People who perhaps live on the same street are treated differently. One family could have an income of €100,000 and another family an income of €30,000, yet because of the way the system is built, the family receiving €100,000 gets this fund and the family on the lower income does not. We must have a standard so that everybody is treated equally. The fact that there is not a standard is a major problem. It is beyond time that we started to reform this payment and recognise that everybody should be treated equally in this country.

Deputy Carol Nolan

I am delighted to get the opportunity to speak on this very important issue this evening. I am totally opposed to the scheme because it is clear that it is radically distorting the private rental market. It is essentially a form of preferential treatment that is not available to renters in other categories. The problem with the scheme is that it is divisive. From the launch of the scheme in July 2022 to 3 March 2025, approximately €256 million has issued to more than 22,600 hosts in respect of hosting almost 5,300 temporary protection beneficiaries. As of 3 March 2025, there were almost 20,000 active claims in payment in respect of hosting almost 37,000 temporary protection beneficiaries from Ukraine. Now that the ceasefire is in place and a peace deal looks increasingly likely for Ukraine, it is time for us to actively encourage Ukrainians who can return home to do so. Everybody knows we have a housing emergency and we need those rooms for our own rental market.

I also want to highlight the issue of a contribution towards accommodation. It is shameful that fully employed or self-employed IPAS applicants are not being asked to contribute a single cent towards the cost of their accommodation. I discovered this last year through a series of parliamentary questions and it was confirmed to me yet again in a recent follow-up question. Why is this level of double standard being allowed to persist? Those on the housing assistance payment, HAP, who work must contribute towards the cost of their accommodation. Why does that not apply in the same way to IPAS applicants? It is very unfair.

I am aware of many people who are in receipt of HAP who work part time, who are doing their best and who have young families, yet they are asked to contribute, which they willingly and wholeheartedly do, while IPAS applicants are not asked to contribute a single cent. That is fundamentally wrong and it must be changed quickly because it is creating a lot of anger, frustration and division. I ask the Government to change this because it is blatant discrimination and unfairness towards our own people who are desperately trying to work. I am aware of many parents who work part time. They are trying to keep their children in school or in college. They are doing their level best and yet they are contributing towards their accommodation, which is only right and fair, but they see others in the IPAS system who are not contributing a cent. That is totally unfair. I ask for a change in that regard.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan)

I now call on the Minister to conclude the debate.

Deputy Paul Murphy

Is there any chance of getting in?

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan)

No, it is at the discretion of the Chair. Deputy Murphy was not here on time so I am moving on to the Minister. The debate is time-limited.

Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (Deputy Norma Foley)

I appreciate the contributions of all Deputies. I thank them for taking the time to carefully consider this motion to extend the ARP scheme. It would be remiss of me, however, if I did not mention in particular the former Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, and acknowledge his sterling work in this area and in the provision of care for Ukrainians. I wish to put that on the record.

As provided for under the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022, the draft order laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas cannot be made law until a resolution approving the order has been passed by each House. Therefore, approval of the motion in Dáil Éireann today is essential to ensure that the scheme does not lapse and that it continues for a further year. That is the sole issue for consideration today: to extend the scheme until 2026. I advise Deputies that if they vote against the motion, they are voting against the opportunity to extend the scheme until March 2026. That is the sole provision in the motion today.

I am keenly aware from correspondence I have received of the need for certainty for hosts and for beneficiaries who fear that they will face a cliff edge in terms of supports. This scheme's extension will give clarity and assurance to those involved.

I reiterate that failure to extend the scheme presents significant risks. Should the scheme fall, some 37,600 beneficiaries could potentially be displaced into an already pressurised rental market or face a return to State-contracted accommodation. The latter would be a regressive step for families who are integrating in communities and being given a sense of agency. Moreover, it would represent a significant cost to the State and have an adverse impact on the tourism sector.

I acknowledge the concerns raised by Deputies today, in particular the possible displacement effect the scheme has on the private rental market. I note that Deputy Carthy's proposed amendment to limit the extension of the scheme to beneficiaries of temporary protection covered by the scheme who satisfy a means test. It is also proposed to restrict the scheme to applicants intending to host beneficiaries in their own residence, and who have not availed of the rent-a-room scheme in the previous 12 months, so as not to affect the private rental sector. Finally, it is proposed to extend the scheme to applicants not in receipt of any additional or top-up payments from a beneficiary. I oppose the amendment to the motion.

The matters raised in the proposed amendments to the ARP scheme would require an amendment to the primary legislation that established the scheme, the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022. They are therefore not matters that have a bearing on the motion under discussion, which is simply to extend the scheme - nothing more and nothing less.

On the issue of means testing for beneficiaries, it is important to note that the ARP is a goodwill payment to recognise the valued contribution of those who have opened their homes to those fleeing the war in Ukraine.

With regard to so-called top-ups, the ARP does not create any obligation on beneficiaries in the accommodation, such as payment of rent or provision of services. However, a beneficiary may agree with a host to contribute towards certain household costs such as utilities.

Deputy Carthy's amendment to limit the scheme to those hosting in their primary residence would result in reduced availability of accommodation for beneficiaries in need of shelter. It would preclude unoccupied homes offered through the "Offer a Home" scheme, such as holiday homes, which have been a valuable source of accommodation.

It is clear that the scheme has been responsible for introducing an accommodation stream that would not have been otherwise available, and which has been a vital element of the State's response to the Ukraine crisis in providing shelter to families who have lost their homes.

The accommodation recognition payment is acknowledged to be an effective instrument of public policy which we cannot afford to lose at this point. It is in our collective interest to ensure the scheme does not fail. I hope Members will support the motion, which is simply to extend the scheme. Should the scheme be extended, its operation will be the subject of planning across the relevant Departments and, as I said, the future of the scheme will need to be reflected in the wider context of considering what comes after the temporary protection directive.

On another note, the draft order on the reduced payment will shortly be brought before the Oireachtas by my colleague, the Minister for Justice, following the transfer of functions. The issue of reduced payment and otherwise will be a matter for the Minister for Justice in due course. It is not on the agenda today and is not part of the motion. The purpose of today is simply to extend the scheme, no more and no less. Members should be advised of that when they consider how they will vote. I confirm that I am not in a position to accept the amendment to the motion proposed today. The draft order being considered cannot be made law until a resolution approving the order has been passed by each House. Therefore, approval of the motion by the Dáil today is essential to ensure the continuation of the scheme for a further year, no more, no less.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Mar 2025