As part of a move toward greater transparency in the delivery of social housing, Minister for Housing James Browne has announced the publication of a league table ranking the performance of Ireland’s 31 local authorities. Read more HERE.
Social homes are delivered in a number of ways under the Housing for All programme:
- Own-builds by the council
- Buying homes in turnkey conditions
- Buying them from non-profit approved housing agencies
- Or having them transferred from developers under Part V of the Planning Act.
These rankings are based on each council’s delivery of social homes, and the main aim is to get councils to carry out more “own-build” projects, or homes directly built by councils on public land.
Key Highlights from the Report.
| Metric | Figure |
|---|---|
| National Social Homes Target (2022–2024) | 27,400 homes |
| National Social Homes Delivery (2022-2024) | 23,414 homes |
| Actual Own-Build Delivery (2022-2024) | Just over 5,000 homes (18%) |
| Top 3 Overall Performers | Laois (189%) Meath (169%) Wicklow (142%) |
| Lowest 3 Overall Performers | SLigo (55%) Dublin City (49%) Donegal (46%) |
| Worst Own-Build Performers | Cork County, Kildare, Louth (<10% of targets) |
Weak Overall Own-Build Performance across the Board.
Between 2022 and 2024, councils were expected to deliver 27,400 social homes mainly through self-build projects. But all councils only delivered just over 5,000 own-build homes, meeting just 18% of the target.
Pushing for More Accountability
The league table may help promote transparency and accountability. This could also help to determine progress across councils and inform future decision-making for the government.
Ireland’s Overall Social Housing League Table (2022-2024)
Local authorities ranked on delivery of new social homes against target, 2022 to 2024
What is the League Table Really not Showing?
At a glance, I think the league table ranking is straightforward for the passive reader and feels informative. However, I know from experience that this is too little data and probably only reflects part of the bigger picture.
Here are my reasons why:
1. Own-Build Shortfalls Are Systemic, Not Just Local Failures
While only 5000 overall own-builds may look like poor performance at the local level today, let’s not forget that the government decided to significantly reduce funding for social housing after the 2008 housing crisis.
I believe that suddenly reversing that decision may not be so straightforward, and will make it difficult for many local councils to readjust. We also need to consider that some councils could be limited by:
- Insufficient state funding or public zoned land due to terrain (ie, West Ireland is typically more rugged and hilly than the East)
- Long planning and procurement processes (it is no secret just how difficult Ireland’s planning processes can be)
- Possible limited staff capacity in housing and planning departments
- Other possible regulatory or structural delays that could slow delivery, even when projects are shovel-ready
2. High Performers May Have Structural Advantages
Counties like Laois (189% of target) or Meath (169%) appear to be outperforming, which is great!
This could be due to a very competent current political and planning regime in both regions. And if that is the case, then these counties could create a blueprint that could be adopted by other counties.
If that isn’t the case, then maybe these regions already have historical access to zoned land or better infrastructure. We do not know for sure.
In contrast, larger urban authorities like Dublin City Council may have limited land or more complex planning environments due to its population.
3. League Tables Don’t Capture Policy Complexity
As I mentioned previously, the delivery of social housing in Ireland happens through a mix of channels:
- Own-build by councils
- Turnkey acquisitions (already completed homes by other builders)
- Approved Housing Bodies (AHBs)
- Part V developer transfers
Councils may favour different approaches based on their local context. For example, a low own-build score could be offset by a high rate of turnkey acquisitions. Yet, the league table treats all underperformance as equal, without showing how councils actually balance their delivery mix.
4. Incentives Without Support Could Backfire
Publishing league tables may apply public pressure. But if under-resourced councils are shamed without full public data or proper government support, these counties may face demoralisation rather than progress.
5. Chase for Rankings & Not Suitability
There’s also a risk that councils could start chasing numerical targets to look good, rather than delivering homes that are suited to local demand. In the short term, this could also lead to:
Quantity over quality – Fast builds may result in poor design or low-quality finishes.
Wrong homes in wrong places – Delivering homes in areas with low demand just to meet targets.
Short-term contracts – Rushed buying may lock councils into higher costs or weaker terms.
Can Social Modular Housing Improve Future Outcomes?
Yes.
Non-standard housing such as modular homes can help meet future targets more efficiently.
- Speed: Well-managed modular projects can reduce build times by up to 50%!
- Cost Control: With rising construction costs, they can offer more predictable budgeting.
- Adaptability: Smaller modular units can fill short-term gaps in areas with volatile demand or planning issues. Authorities like Co. Donegal that are well known for having Mica/Pyrite, might benefit greatly from modular pilot schemes or Modern Methods of Construction (MMC).
CONCLUSION – Transparency is Great, But Direction & Leadership are More Important.
Introducing ‘league tables’ may be a step toward accountability in Ireland’s social housing system. It can help to show differences in performance across local authorities, and the data can help identify where support, reform, or innovation is most needed.
However, the solution is not just about counting completions. It is about building better, faster, and smarter. I will keep saying this : Modular and other non-standard housing methods can absolutely help reduce delivery gaps, and government needs to seriously consider this on a national level.
Nonetheless, I will be the first to admit that these solutions need more than just investment. They demand clear direction, consistent political backing, and professional project management. Without a well-coordinated national strategy and strong local implementation, even the most efficient construction methods will fail social housing delivery.
