'Homelessness is a very different thing from rough sleeping - the subject of most posters that seek funding for homelessness.' Stock image

Demanding an answer to the question 'Just how bad a Housing Minister is Eoghan Murphy' is only half a question.

There is no right answer to a wrong question and there is no greater falsehood than a half-truth - hence the oath in court demanding that the witness tells 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'.

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time," quoted Winston Churchill in 1947, as post-war Britain faced into a period of unprecedented uncertainty that saw the rise of populist innovations, such as the disastrous nationalisations of the coal, steel and gas industries as well as the railways.

Similarly, any minister of a department who oversees any upsetting aspect of life can be equally criticised as the worst ever minister for 'allowing' road traffic accidents, suicides, cancer deaths, or homelessness.

Populist denunciations of wrongdoing by authority figures has become a new blood sport, yet such attacks can be confounded by asking the accuser the simple question: 'Compared to what?' How bad compared to the past? How bad compared to other countries? How bad compared to previous ministers?

For example, the counts of rough sleepers in Dublin have varied little over the last 12 years, through boom and bust. There was a minimum of 59 and a maximum 184 - the current figure is 92. This has happened on the watch of five separate ministers, drawn from Fine Gael, Fianna Fail, Labour and the Green Party. Life - with all its tragedies - marches heedlessly onwards, no matter who is in power.

Attempts have been made to close this form of analytical dialogue by outrage. Critics denounce comparisons as attempts to diminish the crisis by 'normalising' or 'contextualising' it or by claiming that it is 'victim shaming', or that the minutiae of comparative data are out of date or irrelevant.

The list of methods used to try to shake off the troublesome question, 'compared to what?', is long. Perhaps the vigour of the attempts to stifle this type of analysis should be taken as a compliment to its appropriateness and effectiveness.

When formulating public policy, the truth must be told by using facts and not by making emotional appeals. 'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act' has become the slogan for those who point out that truth is the new hate speech, where facts are not always welcome.

The facts are that, in terms of comparisons on the broad canvas of housing, Ireland now fares well in the context of Europe; having the fourth lowest level of overcrowding; the fifth lowest housing overburden rate and Europe's lowest levels of severe housing deprivation and households with children facing overcrowding.

Indeed, in every one of the 11 factors examined in the indicators of European Homelessness 2019 report, Ireland is better than the EU average in every one, except in the fundamental issue of arrears - as well as the prevalence of lone women with dependent children among households experiencing damp housing. These are facts.

Those confronted with using alarmism to further their cause often counter by saying "Ah, what's the harm of a bit of exaggeration, if it shocks people into giving money. Sure, it's a worthy cause". The harm of exaggeration and alarmism is that it can cause the misdirection of scarce resources into photogenic 'misery porn' projects - as Patsy McGarry courageously called out in last week's Irish Times.

In the case of housing, charities and activist journalism all try to vigorously make the case that homelessness must be the national priority - which is a misdirection. Homelessness is a result of lack of affordability, not lack of housing. This critique has often been derided, but this reality has been confirmed since the recovery of housing supply, which has done little to change the number of homeless.

In fact, housing supply appears to be surging - as evidenced by more than 20pc increases in new homes built; commenced or permitted in 2018 - a remarkable achievement.

This has taken the heat out of price increases which have slowed to only 1.1pc in September 2019, approaching the typical inflation rate of the rest of the economy.

Meanwhile the real issues, like mortgage arrears, go neglected. Currently between 28,000-30,000 such family homes have been in arrears for more than two years. The Central Bank's latest figures up to the last quarter of last year says there are 19,000 who have been unable to meet any commitments for over five years. This figure masks more complex realities - with poorer households having significantly less [and falling] arrears compared to the general population in which nearly 8pc have such problems - over twice the EU average.

This is real trouble on a very large scale, but there are solutions - though you wouldn't know about it to read the media; nor would you know that solutions such as Mortgage-to-Rent exist - which keeps financially distressed families in their homes. This approach may have the capacity to keep up to 8-9,000 households in their houses. This approach surely needs even more attention.

This brings us to answering the 'Compared to what?' question. Even allowing for the complexity of international comparisons, it is sobering to contemplate the scale of housing and homelessness issues around the world compared to Ireland.

We have around 10,000 people who are classified as 'homeless'. By comparison in Scotland in 2018-19, 36,465 homeless applications were made, of whom 29,894 were assessed as homeless by their local authority - an increase of 3pc, or 892 applications, compared to the previous year.

Homelessness is a very different thing from rough sleeping - the subject of most posters that seek funding for homelessness. The Dublin region has 92 people who were recorded as rough sleeping this year compared to 152 in 2018. Brussels has 150 rough sleepers; in 2015 Lisbon had 431. It is sobering to consider the comparable figures for larger cities such as London which has 8,855; Paris 2,232; Los Angeles 44,000; Seattle 12,112; San Francisco 9,700; New York City 3,588, and San Diego 8,576. Homelessness is a part of the reality of capital cities and large cities all over the world.

There is one final comparison that must be borne in mind. Dealing with homelessness must be compared with the effect on those who are not homeless. Ministers for housing must juggle the maddening complexity of the consequences of their successes. The housing market recovers - people are relieved to at last be freed from the shackles of negative equity - yet in the same breath they curse the rising prices because their children are locked out of the market by the rising price of new homes. No winning for a minister there.

More troublingly, the improvement in the provision of more than 8,000 new high-quality social houses has the potential to badly bruise those working hard to enter the private housing market. These who struggle to save have the potential to feel inequitably treated compared to those in receipt of social housing. No winning for a minister there either.

Yes, this is the worst minister - except for all those others that have been tried from time to time, in any place, all over the world.

Sunday Independent