Social housing data in Mayo 'raises more questions than answers'

A total of 518 vacant social homes were brought back into active use in Mayo between 2014 and 2023 under the Voids Programme, according to figures from the Department of Housing.

The Mayo figure was lower per head of population than other counties in Connacht but the cost of renovating the properties was also significantly less. A total of €3.4 million was spent in Mayo bringing 518 social homes back into use compared to €7.5 million spent by Sligo County Council in refurbishing 492 homes during the same ten-year period.

Galway County Council spent €7 million on 478 homes while Galway City Council spent €4.6m on 308 homes. Roscommon (€3.1 million on 301 houses) and Leitrim (€2.7 million on 207 houses) were the only local authorities in the country to spend less than Mayo.

Mayo County Council did not have a breakdown of how many houses were vacant for short periods and required minor renovations.

Independent Councillor Michael Kilcoyne said the figures, as published, raised more questions than answers.

“Those figures do not tell us anything apart from that about one-quarter of the social housing stock was brought back into use during that period,” he said. “What I would like to know is the number of long-term vacant homes that were brought back into use.” 

Cllr Kilcoyne stressed the figures do not clarify, for example, how many of the 518 homes in Mayo were vacant for a short period - after a death, for example - and returned to the council or how many required minor refurbishments.

“It is like a lot of figures that come out from the Department, and indeed the council, on a lot of things, they are really woolly, and they raise more questions than answers,” he added.

Tom Gilligan, the Director of Services for Housing at Mayo County Council, said the council had reached and surpassed its targets during the period. 

“We have a huge focus on trying to get stock back into use as quickly as possible."

Asked why Sligo Co Council had spent considerably more per house, he said:

“We utilised the funding allocations we got,” he said. “We put property that we feel is eligible on the scheme and the list, but the whole thing of dereliction and vacancy, it is always an ongoing issue.”