Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands debate -
Wednesday, 14 Feb 2024

Energy Poverty: Discussion (Resumed)

Members who are participating remotely are required to do so from within the Leinster House precincts only. I welcome the witnesses. They are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentation they make to the committee. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at this meeting. However, they are expected not to abuse this privilege and it is my duty, as Cathaoirleach, to ensure this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person or entity either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity.

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

Today we are considering the impact of energy poverty and the retrofitting of homes in rural and urban areas. This is the second meeting of the committee on this topic. Today's meeting was scheduled with officials from the Departments of the Environment, Climate and Communications and Social Protection, however only the former are with us today. Our third meeting on this topic will be held next week. Today, the committee will consider the effectiveness of the fuel allowance and retrofitting of houses during these cold days. This is an item the joint committee has had on its work programme for some time. It is imperative in these colder weeks and months that those who are most vulnerable in society have sufficiently warm homes to allow them stay healthy and well.

From the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, I welcome: Mr. Robert Deegan, principal officer, residential energy efficiency; Ms Justina Corcoran, principal officer, retail energy policy, consumer support and regulation; and Ms Barbara Lambe, higher executive officer, residential energy efficiency division. I call on Mr. Deegan to make his opening statement.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I thank the committee for the invitation to discuss the important subject of energy poverty. I am joined by Justina Corcoran and Barbara Lambe.

As we are all aware, the high cost of energy brought on by volatility in wholesale gas market in recent years has had a significant impact on the cost of living for many households. While most suppliers have announced price reductions in recent months, the average price of electricity and gas is still significantly higher for households compared to pre-energy crisis levels. The key concern of the Department and the Government has always been to protect the most vulnerable. Proof of this is the range of support measures introduced during budgets 2023 and 2024. More than 2 million households have each received over €1,000 in direct support across the electricity cost emergency benefit schemes. A reduced VAT rate on energy, extended disconnection moratoria and increased rates of payment and lump sum payments for recipients of the fuel allowance are just some other examples of this support. The energy poverty action plan, which was published in December 2022, set out a range of measures to ensure that those least able to afford increased energy costs were supported and protected to adequately heat and power their homes.

Implementation of this plan is being monitored by a cross-departmental steering group and an annual report on progress will be published next month. A revised energy poverty action plan will be published before the end of quarter 2 this year. It is the Department’s intention to launch a public consultation in the coming weeks to assist with the development of this action plan and ensure that stakeholders have the opportunity to contribute to the process.

Improving the energy efficiency of our homes is the best way to protect vulnerable households from the effects of higher prices or income changes in the long term. Retrofitting also brings multiple other benefits such as improved health and well-being and better air quality. The national retrofit plan sets out the Government's approach to retrofitting the equivalent of 500,000 homes to a building energy rating, BER, of B2 and installing 400,000 heat pumps in existing homes by 2030. Fairness, universality and customer-centricity are three of the key principles of the national retrofit plan. In line with these principles, the plan recognises that supports are necessary to help households vulnerable to energy poverty to retrofit their homes.

The warmer homes scheme, which provides fully funded energy upgrades for households at risk of energy poverty, is a critical support in that regard. Much higher budgets have enabled a significant increase in the number of homeowners supported and the depth of the retrofits funded under the scheme in recent years. Last year alone, 5,900 fully funded upgrades were delivered at a cost of €157 million. This was a 33% increase on completions in 2022. The depth and complexity of retrofits provided under the scheme have also increased significantly in recent years. This can be seen in the average cost of upgrades provided, which increased from €2,600 in 2015 to €24,000 last year. Waiting times also improved from an average of 26 months in 2022 to an average of 20 months in 2023.

It is important to note that low-income households are also supported through other SEAI grant schemes. For instance, last year, over 700 approved housing body and low-income homes were upgraded under the national home energy upgrade scheme and the community energy grant scheme. In addition, 2,445 local authority-owned homes were upgraded under the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage’s local authority energy efficiency retrofitting programme.

Budget 2024 has again allocated a record level of funding for retrofitting schemes. Just under €300 million has been allocated across the warmer homes scheme and local authority retrofit scheme, which is 57% of the total Government budget for retrofit. I again thank the committee for the invitation to attend today. We are happy address any questions members may have.

It is a bitter disappointment that witnesses from the Department of Social Protection are not here. The reason is that it would be very interesting to have witnesses from both Departments in the same room. Do both Departments often get into the same room to discuss energy poverty given that we are talking about two sides of the same coin? The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications has a significant role to play, particularly in the roll-out of measures like retrofit, but there should be a hand-in-glove approach. Do the Departments hold regular scheduled meetings at which energy poverty is the primary item on the agenda?

Ms Justina Corcoran

We have an interdepartmental inter-agency steering group that oversees the implementation of the energy poverty action plan. The Department of Social Protection is on that group as well as officials from the Departments of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, Health, and Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The areas that I and Mr. Deegan deal with, and a couple of other areas, are represented. The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, and other agencies are also represented. The group meets every four to six weeks. We oversee the implementation of the actions in the energy poverty action plan. We also meet bilaterally with the Department of Social Protection outside that group coming up to the budget, particularly when dealing with energy credits, to ensure a balance of payments as regards energy credits and the fuel allowance. We would look at the impact on people who are particularly vulnerable to energy poverty. There is ongoing engagement with that Department.

I am heartened to hear that. Is the seniority of the officials attending those meetings sufficient to make things happen?

Ms Justina Corcoran

A principal officer is in attendance at those meetings.

Very good. When I am thinking about the green and digital transitions, I think of the words of William Gibson, which I have used here before. He said: "The future is already here – it's just not very evenly distributed". That is very true and retrofit is a good example of it. I know the many programmes outlined by the witnesses are very welcome but it will take a long time before the retrofit programme reaches everybody. I often think of the people who are wealthy enough to afford to have their home retrofitted with electric panels on the roof and who drive an electric car charged off those panels. They are already living in this future but there are a lot of people who are living in very poor quality social housing possibly from the 1930s and 1950s - whatever era it was built in. We got some interesting figures on the breakdown of the performance rating of those homes.

In the immediate term, the lever we could use in the shortest possible timeframe was money and we made energy credits available. That was the correct response. I have some distributional questions around those. In the long term, we want to retrofit every property in the land so that everyone is living in a B1-rated property or higher. Are there medium-term measures in place? I worry about people being left behind? What I want is for people to feel that the energy transition is working for them. When I think about medium-term measures, I think about what EnergyCloud is doing. We have a curtailment on our electricity because it is windy so let us dump it into some cylinders. I am thinking about solar panels on social homes because a deep retrofit is a pain, whereas fitting insulation and solar panels is quick and easy and give people the benefit of the transition. I am thinking about what the Austrians did in funding two energy-efficient appliances for social homes on the basis that the residents probably had a bad, energy-intensive washing machine that was not doing a great job. It decided that those residents would get a little bit of the benefit of the energy transition by funding some energy-efficient appliances.

I understand energy credits on the short-term lever. Long term, we are going for deep retrofit across our housing stock but that is a 20-year project. What are we going to do in the middle period to make sure people are getting the benefit from the transition?

Ms Justina Corcoran

There are some other schemes. There is a solar PV scheme for the medically vulnerable which offers free solar PV installation for people on the registered vulnerable list. There are 3,000 people who are eligible for that scheme, which is under way. It will be one of the interim measures. We are going out to consultation within the next week or two on the energy poverty action plan with a view to having an updated energy poverty action plan published in quarter 2 of this year. The existing one has a number of short-term measures around the credit and social protection supports and has some of the longer term measures around energy efficiency. It is definitely recognised that there other measures that would be very beneficial in the medium term. Hopefully, through the consultation, we will get some more detail on which of those will work better.

The European Commission published 25 recommendations in November. Some of the areas mentioned by the Deputy are set out in those recommendations, particularly around energy efficiency in white goods. I have microgeneration on my side of the house. Another issue is smart technology solutions, for example, giving people solar panels but also a water diverter. Somebody with mobility issues might be given a smart thermometer system and a water diverter, which probably has more value to him or her. There is a lot of stuff coming from Europe recommending that this is the direction we need to follow.

On the energy poverty action plan, we look to see how we measure up with regard to the 35 recommendations and how we can create that ambition. That is what it will be framed under.

What is the title of the European Commission report?

Ms Justina Corcoran

The European Commission came out with recommendations around energy poverty.

I can send it over.

I will surely find it from that.

Ms Justina Corcoran

Yes, that is 2025. I think they published them in October 2023.

I will stick with the theme of smart technology and smart meters, in particular. Small meters could be installed in the short term rather than the medium term. The installation of smart meters has been rolled out and the penetration is very good at this point. Trying to understand the best energy package to suit someone's data is not straightforward. It is something that could be very easily supported in respect of people who are living with energy poverty. First, it could be ensured that such people are on the plan that works best for them. A lot of people use the PrePay Power model. That is not great value for money and is a challenge to try and overcome. If we get people on to a bill pay system and help them analyse their electricity costs and when is the best time, such an initiative would not just be good news for the customer or the person living in energy poverty. As the witnesses know well, it would be good news for the energy system to displace some of that peak power usage to other times. It would be good news for the grid if energy efficient appliances were running overnight or whatever. Is this being looked at?

Ms Justina Corcoran

Yes. There is a smart energy steering group chaired by my division, and CRU, SEAI and ESBN are all members of the group. Last week, we had all of the suppliers come in to do a workshop, which gave consideration to the fact that while we have 1.6 million smart meters installed. Of the number of people who are signed up to a smart tariff only 20% of them have access to the data and maybe 10% of those have a smart tariff, which is a lacuna in the offerings and we tried to figure out why that is the case. Some of that is because it is difficult for people to change behaviour. A lot of people just cannot change their usage. If I am out of my house working from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., I only have the hours between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. so I must have assets in place. If I have solar power and a battery, I have the means to shift that behaviour.

If there was an officer in every county council whose role was to advise people in social housing or with HAP tenancies on their best electricity usage and what plan was best for them, such an initiative would be incredibly powerful as it does not involve the building of infrastructure and a lot of good jobs would be created but they would take time.

I wish to ask one last question and I might join a second round of questions. I worry about people with HAP tenancies. They are very difficult to reach. Whatever about the simple approach of applying energy credits, which does reach them, there is not a great incentive for landlords to upgrade their properties. These tenants qualify for social housing and the associated income limits. When I talk about people whom it will be difficult to reach and difficult to make them feel they are part of this energy transition, the people in HAP tenancies are the ones who stand out. Is that being examined as a specific challenge and are ways to reach those people being examined?

Ms Justina Corcoran

We are automatically doing that.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Yes, the rental sector is a particularly challenging area and is known as a split incentive. That has really caused a lot of problems. By that, I mean the incentives to upgrade the properties are not aligned between the tenant and the landlord. It is something that is seen across Europe and the world. It is something we are very keen to address because we cannot leave the rental sector behind as we upgrade the rest of the housing stock, which is something very clearly articulated in the national retrofit plan.

I will set out what we have in place at the moment. There are approved housing bodies. For that cohort of people in the rental sector, there are generous supports available through the community energy grant scheme and the national home energy upgrade scheme. There are enhanced supports for AHB tenancies, under those schemes, rather than just the standard upgrade rates. There is also a new tax incentive that was introduced by the Department of Finance. It is a tenant in situ scheme so there is a tax relief of up to €10,000 to support landlords to retrofit their properties.

Has uptake of that tax relief been really poor?

Mr. Robert Deegan

It has. There is probably something we need to do about communicating the scheme a little bit better to landlords and we will have an opportunity to do that from next month. There are three blocks: the grant support; the tax incentive for landlords; and the new low-cost home energy upgrade loan scheme, which is the missing link that will be in place from next month. The new scheme will provide loans of between €5,000 and €75,000, and will be available at low rates to landlords as well as private homeowners.

Am I correct that loan scheme will be available at the end of next month?

Mr. Robert Deegan

That is correct, yes. When those three supports are taken together, we think we are addressing the key issues in the rental sector. The tax incentive was in response to consultations with the landlords. That is what they said they needed to address their homes. It is a very challenging area. We will need to see how this combination of measures works and then analyse whether we need to do anything further or different.

On the previous question about short- and medium-term measures for people who are not sufficiently up the queue for the warmer homes scheme or cannot afford a retrofit, information and communication, and people making small behavioural changes, can make a huge difference through things like the energy kits. When I worked with Ms Corcoran's colleagues on the energy poverty scheme and the poverty action plan, we tried to ensure we provided something for every cohort of people that is struggling. Some people cannot afford anything in terms of investing in their property so for that cohort information is probably is key as well as financial supports while they await the free upgrade as part of the warmer homes scheme. The energy kits available from local libraries provide information on where heat is being lost in a house.

In response to the point made about appliances, people can buy an adaptor for plugs that measures the energy used by a fridge, dryer or washing machine. The adaptor allows people to identify the appliances that use all of the energy and then people can adjust their behaviour as needs be or people can focus their expenditure on replacing the high-energy use appliance, which might not always be the most obvious one. There are communication campaigns such as the Stay Warm and Well campaign, which encourage people to look after themselves while keeping an eye on their energy use and using energy as well as possible. It is, therefore, about information and communication, and then sustainable energy communities, SECs, where people are active in their communities looking at their energy use and what they can do about it.

The energy kits have been in libraries for nearly seven years. What has been the uptake?

Mr. Robert Deegan

It is not done through our Department but the Department of Rural and Community Development, which operates the library system. In our discussions with them, the energy kits are in high demand and an increased number of kits have been distributed through the library network. Last year, the energy crisis put a renewed focus on everyone's energy use. There was a strong push to get that and there was a spike in demand for the kits.

The next member who had indicated a wish to speak was Senator Paddy Burke but he seems to have taken his hand down as he must leave. The next speaker is Deputy Ó Laoghaire.

I thank the witnesses for coming in. I share the point made by Deputy Ó Cathasaigh that it is always great when we have officials from two Departments attending, particularly when the Ministers are not attending because all of the officials can contribute, which leads to a fruitful discussion. That is not their fault but it is a source of regret all the same.

My first question is probably something that they will have anticipated. For clarity, is the warmer homes scheme the free scheme?

Mr. Robert Deegan

Yes.

A person can qualify for the warmer homes scheme if he or she receives a disability or partial capacity allowance but not if it is an invalidity pension. Maybe the angle is that the invalidity pension is a means-tested payment. Having said that, these are primarily people who are either not going to work again for a very long time or may never work again. A means test is done usually because the person's partner is earning a middle income. There is not a lot of money in the house usually in these circumstances. An awful lot of people in receipt of invalidity pension suffer energy poverty.

My colleague, Deputy O'Rourke, asked a parliamentary question about this and the answer he received was that it was not being changed at the moment but the Government would keep an eye on it. Will the Department elaborate on the logic? Has there been more than a cursory examination of this in the past year or two? Has there been an active discussion of whether people on invalidity pension can be brought into the warmer homes scheme?

Mr. Robert Deegan

The eligibility criteria for the scheme are kept under ongoing review. On the previous Deputy's point, we have ongoing conversations with the Department of Social Protection because effectively we piggyback on its eligibility criteria for the fuel allowance. Jobseeker's allowance, working family payment, one-parent family payment, domiciliary care allowance and disability allowance are the payments that currently qualify. The invalidity pension is a social insurance payment as opposed to a means-tested payment. In recent years, the emphasis for any expansion has been on the means-tested payments as opposed to the non-means-tested ones. People who are in receipt of invalidity pension are often in receipt of or eligible for the fuel allowance and other social protection payments. When they ask us the question about it, we always encourage them to apply for those other means-tested payments in the first instance so they get the financial support and the secondary support of the warmer homes scheme. We keep this under ongoing review. It is not completely closed, but the policy direction in recent years has very much been to ensure we target in the best possible way and the best way to target is through means testing to ensure that the people who can least afford fuel are the people who get the allowance. That has been the rationale for the existing eligibility criteria.

Okay. Actually I came at that a little wrongly. Mr. Deegan is correct when he says it is the other way around, but the point is that there are people in receipt of the invalidity pension who might well qualify under a means test but have chosen an invalidity payment because of medical criteria and it might be easier to get if they have the contributions. Some people who are on the invalidity pension might have the same income as someone who is on disability allowance, but they have not had to go through a means test. I urge the Department to keep that under review. Many people who are on invalidity pension have very low incomes and are under severe pressure. It includes many older people and people with severe disabilities and illnesses. It is important to keep it under review and I urge the Department to do so.

To put in place the air-to-water heat pump, a house is required to be at a certain energy-efficiency level. Otherwise the benefit of it will be lost. There is a fair difference between the targets and where we are at the moment. Much of that is to do with the fact that so many homes of people who are in fuel poverty are not suitable for heat pumps. For families and individuals who are currently in homes using solid fuels or kerosene and so forth, what is the solution? What is the Department looking at? What can be done in the short term to assist them with reducing their emissions and their costs?

Mr. Robert Deegan

The range of schemes we have available at the moment are focused on two things: ensuring the fabric is upgraded to the standard that would allow a heat pump to operate effectively and efficiently, and then the heat pump itself. Some other jurisdictions look at those in isolation. We look at them in an integrated way and that is the right way. We want to ensure the heat pumps operate in an effective way and the heat-loss indicator is the tool that has been used until now to ensure the heat pumps operate effectively. That measures the amount of heat being lost through the walls and windows of a house. Heat pumps operate in a different way from gas or oil boilers. They involve a far lower temperature than oil or gas boilers, which blast out heat. A heat pump provides more constant heat.

As I mentioned earlier, universality and being people-centred are the influencing principles behind the design of the schemes so we have a combination of measures. They are the warmer homes scheme for people who live in energy poverty and the better energy homes scheme for people who want to take a step-by-step approach over a period. They might do their fabric first to stop losing heat and install the heat pump later. There is also the one-stop shop scheme which focuses on bringing properties to a B2 energy rating and installing a heat pump all at once. We recognise that not everyone will be able to do that. That is why we have an option available for people who want to do it step by step, and we have the warmer homes scheme for people with the lowest incomes. There is a pilot under the warmer homes scheme for installing heat pumps. The number has been relatively low so far but we hope to build on that this year and in the coming years, because the budget is so big for the warmer homes scheme now that we really want to ensure that at the same time as addressing energy poverty to the greatest extent possible, we are meeting our climate objectives. It is about balancing the scorecard the whole time. We are trying to maximise the outputs and deepen the retrofits to ensure that homeowners get the best possible homes for their health and well-being, so they have lower energy bills and for all the other reasons. The fabric and the heat pump as a package is the way it is being done at the moment for most houses. However, there is a whole cohort of houses that are suitable for a heat pump straightaway. Heat pumps are the preferred option and we are trying to make it as easy as possible for home owners to make the decision to switch from gas and oil and to install a heat pump when their gas or oil boiler comes to the end of its life. We are working with the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. New initiatives will be rolled out on an ongoing basis to try to make the customer journey as easy as possible and to enable homeowners to make that decision.

I will mention one other pilot. It is called the heat loss indicator, HLI, pilot scheme, for homes that do not have the standard of heat loss currently being applied by the SEAI. We are doing it in a controlled way so the homeowner is aware of all the benefits of the heat pump and monitoring energy use and bills later, so we can have an evidence base for future changes to the heat loss criteria.

There are a few issues in that. What Mr. Deegan said about the close alignment of the fabric and the heat pump is coherent. It ensures the impact on that house and householder is as efficient as possible. However, the downside is that we are proceeding slowly with the stock as whole. I am not saying that is necessarily wrong.

My colleague, Deputy O'Rourke, raised the issue of biofuel boilers for those who will be waiting for the fabric upgrades and therefore heat pumps. Mr. Deegan is right that houses that were built in the past 15 or 20 years would be of the required standard and might be ready for heat pumps, but many older people, people at risk of poverty, single parents and people with disabilities are not those who bought houses at the edge of our cities and towns in brand-new three-bedroom semi-detached developments. They are more likely to be in poor-quality older buildings, not exclusively but primarily. For that cohort, is the Department looking at biofuel boilers? Is that on the agenda as an interim solution until fabric upgrades can be offered?

Mr. Robert Deegan

The Deputy mentioned hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO. There is a lot of talk about it at the moment. The policy on the supports the Government provides is informed by a comprehensive piece of work that was done by the SEAI a few years ago, the National Heat Study, which looked at the best way to transition to the heating systems of the future and identified the most suitable technologies. The technologies that came out of that comprehensive analysis - I think it involved seven or eight detailed research papers - were heat pumps and district heating.

The concern around HVO is the availability of it in the quantities that would be needed for it to be used as people's heating source. Also, when we are looking at different uses for inputs like HVO we have to consider what is the best sector to apply them to and the research and analysis point to HVO being best used in the transport sector where there are not available alternatives. In the heating sector, especially with residential heating, after a really thorough evaluation of the various alternatives district heating and heat pumps were identified as the optimal solutions. That is not to say individual homeowners cannot make the change themselves but it is just about the Department and Government's focus. We have a very generous budget but it is limited and we need to ensure the funding is used in the most effective and efficient way, which is through heat pumps, insulation and district heating in due course.

Mr. Deegan might furnish the committee with a copy of that assessment.

Mr. Robert Deegan

That is no problem.

I have one more question and then I have two more pieces. That report is not from a million years ago but things develop quickly in this arena. That document is from February 2022 and I imagine some of the studies and considerations it was working off were from 2020, 2021 and so on. Things have evolved. We have our first HVO refinery now in my constituency, as it happens. That is not the reason I am raising it by any manner or means but there is now a refinery in the State and availability of HVO is maybe in a different place than it was when some of those decisions were taken. I hope that study becomes a living document and that the policy can change in consideration of the evolution of the market. Is that a discussion the Department is having at the minute, as the picture around HVO may be changing a bit?

Mr. Robert Deegan

Those concerns would remain about the best use-----

Mr. Robert Deegan

-----of the input. All of the analysis points to the transport sector, as opposed to the heat sector. Something I should have mentioned is that the heat study is informing a national heat policy, which is currently in development. That will be setting out the broader picture for the policy direction on heat. Everything is being considered in that regard. As I said, HVO is very topical at the moment and a lot of people are raising it. That will be give due consideration as part of that process.

I thank Mr. Deegan. I have two more questions-----

Very briefly, because we have a lot of members wishing to come in.

-----and I will ask them together.

I imagine this comes up often but I am concerned at the skills deficit and the fact there is obviously contract within construction and all that kind of stuff. There is a pipeline delay with apprenticeships, especially for electricians and probably plumbers and heating engineers as well. Is that an ongoing conversation with the Department of enterprise? Has Mr. Deegan's Department ways of flagging that?

The other point is, I am not totally clear on how the crossover with the Department of housing and local government works. Much of our poorer stock is composed of older, local authority houses. Some of the challenge of that is much of the low-hanginig fruit has been addressed. In my city, an awful lot of the local authority flats have been done. That is more efficient and easier to do because they are primarily owned exclusively owned by the local authority. Meanwhile,there are estates like Crumlin and Kimmage in Dublin and Ballyphehane and Garranabraher in Cork. They were built in the sixties and half or two thirds of the stock has been bought privately but we still have a substantial amount of local authority stock. However, it is spread out. There might be three, five, 12 or however many houses per street. That seems to be a challenge. A great deal of that stock is of poor quality and needs a deep retrofit. They are block construction of the type where insulation cannot be pumped into the cavity or anything like that. What is the level of Mr. Deegan's Department's responsibility? How does the relationship with the Department of housing discuss and address that? A lot of energy-inefficient buildings are those kinds of local authority housing.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I will take the supply chain question first if that is okay. The national retrofit plan was published in 2021. It identified supply chain skills and standards as one of the four pillars. The pillars were supply chain skills and standards, financing and funding, driving demand and activity and governance and structures. There has been a real focus on supply chain skills and standards and I am happy to report there has been some good progress on that also. To go back to first principles, the first thing we had to do was quantify the problem. We actively participated in the expert group on future skills needs that both quantified the overall number of people needed to hit our retrofit targets and broke it up into the various skill types and skill sets. That report, which was a really comprehensive piece of work, was then handed over to the Department of further and higher education, primarily, and SOLAS, which have been putting a major focus on the retrofitting and near-zero energy building, NZEB, agenda in recent years. The focus has mainly been on two strands, namely, apprenticeships for the long term and upskilling and reskilling for the near term. To give some tangible examples of what has happened, in that period we have gone from having no centres of excellence for retrofitting at NZEB to six around the country as part of the ETBs. Last year, there were more than 4,000 participants on those upskilling and reskilling courses. That is a 100% increase on the previous year and from much lower numbers in years previous to that, so there has been a really concerted effort by our colleagues in the Department of further and higher education and I put on record our appreciation for that because it really has made a difference. There are also flexible online courses. They have got what they call a retrofit rig, which is a mobile retrofit training facility that can go around to not just other ETBs but also to schools. We need to develop the pipeline of young people entering the sector for the future because in the past, there has probably been a focus at secondary school on college and university as the be-all and end-all. Now, the Minister, Deputy Ryan, has been very focused on the green economy and how these are the jobs of the future. On retrofit alone, this is a 30-year programme of work. We are going to do 500,000 houses to 2030. There are another 1.5 million-odd houses that need to be retrofitted in the years after that and then the cycle begins again. For any young people out there, there are the jobs that are going to be well paid. There is an €8.26 billion budget to 2030 to fund this.

Turning to what we in the Department have been doing to support the supply chain, we first secured an NDP allocation of €8 billion and European regional development funding of €264 million. That is not just in place as a big bundle of funding as we have broken it down on a year-by-year basis. That gives certainty to the sector to grow and there is a financial commitment there. When we spoke to the supply chain we were told what was really needed was a commitment the funding was going to be there. We also changed the schemes so they were year-round. In the past the schemes were stop-and-start, so what was happening was people were taking on staff and then having to let them go during the winter because the schemes would take applications for the first quarter, do the work in the second and third quarters and then there would be nothing to be done in the fourth quarter, meaning it was always going up and down. Now the schemes run all year round. There is a pipeline being driven by the fact there is a financial commitment there and that gives the supply chain the capacity to grow and expand.

I have seven people indicating, so I am going to ask people to try to keep their questions tight and then I will refer back to the officials because if we go over and back, we will not get through this. Senator Burke is next.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I have a couple of brief questions to follow what Deputy Ó Laoghaire about the fabric and how that ties in with the heat pump. Heat pumps are very complicated to use. They are very complicated machines. It is not like turning on or off the gas or oil boiler. They have to be set and people have to use the best rate they can, whether it is the day rate or night rate or whatever. In many of those older houses there are also ranges, which run on oil, gas or kerosene and they can be converted to use electricity.

There are certain companies in Ireland now that convert ranges, whether they are Stanley, Rayburn or AGA, to electricity. There will be a big use of electricity and that will apply to the lower grade, as well.

On all of this I have asked this question of other Departments on a number of occasions where I have not seen any progress at all made with regard to small wind turbines. Not every house is suitable for solar panels. Some local authority houses have no room for solar panels. Small wind turbines can be placed on the gable of a house and I am led to believe that they can be put on a chimney pot or on the top of a chimney. They are flexible and with the weather conditions we have, it is more suitable to small wind turbines in the winter time when the high usage of electricity occurs compared to the summer time. We use most of our electricity in the winter time and solar panels are of little use then. In fact, many solar panels produce very little in the weather we have had in the past couple of months.

Have the witnesses had any discussions with the Department on small wind turbines? I have to say that in all of my dealings with the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, it is very efficient, runs a great show and one can always contact it. One sends an email and receives a response straight away but there does not seem to be any grant available for small wind turbines and I could see a big role to be played by them. A bigger wind turbine could be put in a housing estate in a rural setting which could facilitate this type of infrastructure also. Is there any thinking in this regard or has anyone contacted the witnesses about small domestic wind turbines?

This question relates to microgeneration using wind. Which of our witnesses would like to take that question? I call Ms Corcoran, please.

Ms Justina Corcoran

I thank the Chair and the Deputy for the question. At the moment, microgeneration covers wind, hydro and solar but solar is the main show in town and the grants in place are for solar on the microgen side. There does not appear to be too much of a demand coming through on the wind. I am not overly familiar with the wind side of things because it is just not something on which too many questions or interest is coming through to us. We can look into the microgen a little bit more in how can we expand that scheme and consider whether there is that demand out there and if it is as straightforward as the solar PV. The solar PV, because it depends on light, is still a fairly good return during the daylight hours even in the winter months. At the moment there is nothing really there on the wind.

If I may put a supplementary question please, a Chathaoirligh. Ms Corcoran says there is nothing coming through. Does she mean from the Department of housing, from SEAI, from local authorities or from where is it not coming through?

Ms Justina Corcoran

This is in demand. As regards people and the solar PV, there is a great deal of public interest in the scheme in that the numbers have just gone through the roof. There were 6,000 applications in December alone last year and the figures have doubled. There is great public interest in the solar PV and it very much seems to have taken off. We are just not seeing the same numbers of people looking to get the wind energy connections.

There are 70,000 microgen connections at the moment on the grid and all of them are around the solar PV. Wind is just not an area that individuals, homeowners and householders are looking to get support on at the moment but it is obviously something we can look into.

I would like the Department to look into that because it would seem that people have no other option but to go for solar because the grants are for solar. That is basically it.

I thank our witnesses very much for the report. It seems there are a great many things going on behind the scenes between interdepartmental groups, action plans, heat plans etc. I want to go back to the point made at the very beginning which was about fairness for access to the retrofitting. I still do not believe that fairness is there. Has the interdepartmental group looked at this again because at the end of the day the calculations, I believe, are that each retrofit will cost between €14,000 and €66,000? I have heard reports back from some people where it will cost nearly €80,000 or €90,000, as 50% of the costs are given in grants. For many people they cannot actually afford to get that retrofitting yet we are paying the carbon tax. Only people who have money can do this, where, as has been said already; they have their electric car, their solar panels, retrofitting and all of that. Affordability is key for people to buy into the whole concept of climate change and the Government’s responsibility towards the nation from that point of view. Has thought been given that the State must pay the full cost for every home in an equitable manner? That is something which we very much need to look at.

The other thing which always strikes me about retrofitting is that one might have one house on a road being done so, for example, in Drimnagh, on Keeper Road and another house is being done up the road on Comeragh Road and yet we know that there are many houses, for example local authority houses, in between where the efficiency of rolling in the retrofitting has to be looked at.

I believe that if one went into every estate and moved through the country house-by-house on retrofitting, that would be much more efficient than people applying for such work to be done under the SEAI, and tenants waiting for the council to come in. Dublin City Council has said that from the figures it had, that it will retrofit 200 housing units per year. To me, that is due to the lack of efficiency where this work is not being done road by road. The council is not going into an estate and covering all local authority houses at the same time and then moving on to another estate. Has that been looked at? That approach will also cover schools and community centres where all areas could be included. This could also be done in parishes in rural areas. Can I have some feedback from our witnesses on that, please, because that is an important part of this retrofitting along with the concept that we have a climate problem? We need to put resources into ensuring that retrofitting is high on the agenda, with the impact that it has on health, fuel costs, and carbon emissions. We know that fuel energy in people’s homes is causing major problems.

My other question is on smart meters. I have a smart meter. I sat down and tried to work out what the best package for me would be. I gave up after about 20 minutes or half an hour as it was just a difficult process to go through for me. I am just about half tech savvy but for many people who are not tech savvy, that is not an option for them. To echo the point that was made earlier on with regard to the councils, there should be an adviser who would be able to get that information out to people on how to use a smart meter and on how efficient it can be. Something should be looked at in that area to make that more efficient and effective for people. It is a great deal of work and is nearly like coming home to do a day’s work again.

I agree with Deputy Collins on the second point and this is coming from a former Minister for energy. I have a smart meter also and you would need to have a degree to work it out. We might ask Ms Corcoran to respond to those questions, first of all.

Ms Justina Corcoran

I thank the Chair and the Deputy for the questions. On the smart meters, one of the pieces of work the SEAI is currently involved in which will be in place this year is a smart energy portal.

If people have the smart meter, a page will take them through the smart meter journey, including tariffs and usage. People will be able to put data into it. It will be done in a very user-friendly and customer-centred way. At the moment, the only available data is through the ESBN. People can get their own data if they sign up to that and they will be sent a profile where they can see their data usage. Out of 1.6 million users, about 300,000 people are signed up to get that data. It will give people some information, but the portal should make information available to people in a way in which they will be able to understand it and the choices they have in terms of tariffs. They will be able to understand their own usage and how they might be able to shift their behaviour to get better prices on their bills.

Is there any way for people to talk to someone over a counter about this?

Ms Justina Corcoran

At the moment, it is the supplier who people need to speak to. There is another issue around the data that is collected through smart metering. It is only collected for a specific purpose. The only person who has access to that data at the moment is an individual customer. That data cannot be shared. Data access code legislation needs to be put in place in order to make that data more available. Once suppliers have better access to that data, they will be able to profile that and have a conversation with the customer about their usage and the best tariff based on their current usage. If they would like to save money, change their behaviour and shift their usage to a different pattern, they could be informed that another tariff would be best.

There is an issue at the moment around the sharing of that data. The plan is that there will be legislation in place. The CRU has done a lot of work on that. We are now examining what kind of primary legislation needs to be put in place. A piece of work will be done this year around smart data access codes. That will at least make more information available to inform people and enable them to make better decisions. A lot of activity is happening in the whole area of access to smart data and time-of-use tariffs. It will be the end of this year before people see tangible benefits.

The smart meter programme was rolled out seven years ago. We have 1.6 million customers now on it. Why are we only now talking about putting a web page in place with the SEAI? Why are we only now talking about the problem with sharing data? What has gone on over the past seven years? That is when this should have been done so that people could benefit from smart meters.

It seems to me that we roll out everything and then examine the potential benefit. The SEAI or CRU should have put this website in place seven years ago, not now. As a customer, I was not aware that I had to sign up with ESBN to get that data for myself. I am sure the same applies to Deputy Collins. We are an awful lot more tech savvy than the vast majority of older customers. The point is being made that no one is assisting these people in utilising the technology that has been put in place. It is great for ESBN because it does not have to pay meter readers. That was the one bit of communication the company had with older customers and it is now evaporating. However, we do not see the benefit from the point of view of the consumer. That element of all of this seems to be ignored.

Ms Justina Corcoran

There was an issue around getting a critical mass of smart meters installed. There are now 1.6 million of them, but we have to get 2.2 million in. In terms of suppliers and there being a market, people needed to be confident that the smart meter programme would continue and that they would all be installed. It is only now that that is starting to pick up some traction because there needs to be a critical mass of meters installed before products can be designed that are attractive to people and there is an incentive for suppliers to offer products. There is a lot of focus on this at the moment and a lot of work has been done. By the end of this year, there will be a lot more information available for consumers.

From a company point of view, I fully understand that there needed to be critical mass. The issue I have is with the Commission for Regulation of Utilities. People have paid for electricity meters for the past seven years. It was not a case that they were not going to be rolled out; they were already part of the standing charge that people paid. They were going to happen because people were already paying for them. People were going to get their new meter. They should have been able to access that data. CRU, the regulator which, in theory, is supposed to act on behalf of the customer, seems to have ignored that fact. That is the point I am making. I do not want to go over and back on this, but the point I am making is that the regulator has failed the customers in relation to this. Does someone want to address the first question from Deputy Collins?

Mr. Robert Deegan

There were a couple of questions. Deputy Collins mentioned the need for fairness to be at the core of everything. We completely agree. That is why it is one of the principles of the retrofit plan. I will put some numbers on this. This year, €300 million or 57% of the total budget allocated for retrofit is for fully funded upgrades across the warmer homes and local authority schemes. In addition, funding has been provided through the national home energy upgrade scheme.

Of the homes completed last year under the national home energy upgrade scheme, that is, the one-stop shop scheme, 60% were AHB homes. A significant number under the community energy grant scheme fell under the energy poverty heading. In addition, enhanced and very generous grants were introduced under the better energy homes scheme for cavity walls and attic insulation. They are the lowest cost but, in many ways, most cost-effective measures that homeowners can take in order to invest in improving the efficiency of their homes.

On the warmer homes scheme alone, to give the Deputy an idea of the expansion of the budgets in recent years, the budget was €40 million in 2019. The budget this year is €208 million. There is concerted action on fully funded upgrades under the warmer homes scheme to ensure the transition is fair.

A point was made about aggregation. I believe Deputy Ó Laoghaire also mentioned mixed tenure housing stock. Steps have been taken in this regard. In the case of a former local authority housing estate in Fingal, much of which has now been bought out by private homeowners, Fingal County Council is working with the SEAI to come up with a model that will encourage as many of those private homeowners as possible to upgrade their homes at the same time as homes are upgraded by the local authority. I cannot overstate the difficulties associated with that. It seems like a simple idea to hoover up all of the houses at the same time. Let us think about the roads we live on. There are people at different points at their lives with different abilities to pay for upgrades and differences about whether it suits them at a particular moment in time to have people traipsing through their houses and retrofitting their properties. Getting private homeowners to have work done at the same time as local authority housing stock is being upgraded is not always the easiest thing to do.

There are initiatives in the warmer homes scheme to improve the efficiency of the scheme through the allocation process to contractors. More bundles are being given to contractors so that they are not going from one side of the country to the other to do individual homes; rather, they are getting batches of homes, and larger batches of homes, which allow them to do work in a more cost-effective way. We are working with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the European Commission and the Housing Authority in regard to the initiatives to support apartment or flat complexes to be retrofitted all in one go.

That will consider things like mixed tenure or private housing as well as local authority apartment blocks.

Deputy Collins also mentioned schools and community centres being brought into community projects. Again, I did not mention this scheme earlier, but I should have. I refer to the community energy grant scheme, which is set to do exactly that. This is where a project co-ordinator brings together community centres, schools, the local GAA club and a clatter of houses into one project that is supported by the SEAI to upgrade the properties all in one go. There are solutions available there. The budget for that scheme is €45 million.

Does Deputy Collins have a brief supplementary question?

If Mr. Deegan could send us that information, it would be very much appreciated.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Certainly. That is no problem.

I have one last question. Are the loans, grants and tax incentives for landlords linked to the fact that the landlord cannot remove a tenant or increase the rent?

Mr. Robert Deegan

The tax incentive is the tenant in situ scheme. That is based on a continuation of the tenancy. In the vast majority of instances a person does not need to move out to have a property retrofitted. Unless a lot of internal dry lining is being done or underfloor insulation is being put in, there is not a need in the vast majority of cases for somebody to move out.

I note that an issue has been raised previously about rents increasing as a result of the upgrade, which means that tenants need to move on. There are rules that apply in the private rental market such as the upgrade needing to be very significant before tenants can be moved out. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is the policy owner for that particular question on the rules that apply to the rental sector.

Mr. Deegan says his Department has regular meetings with the relevant Departments. Has that issue ever been discussed?

Mr. Robert Deegan

It has been discussed, and the rules are in place. I am not sure whether the scale of the problem has been quantified, if there is a problem and this is happening. We hear anecdotal evidence but I am not sure whether there is hard evidence that retrofitting is leading to such cases. What is really important is that we do not leave the rental sector behind. In addition to the measures I mentioned, the Housing for All plan commits to the introduction of minimum building energy ratings "where feasible". That is the important bit for the private rental sector because, as we all know, supply in that sector is constrained and we do not want to do something that would make matters worse for the sector at a very challenging time. At the same time, we cannot leave behind a sector of the housing stock which, in some instances, is where people on lower incomes reside. It is an area of focus. We will certainly be keeping in contact with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Residential Tenancies Board on that matter.

I thank the witnesses for coming in. Well done to them because until two or three years ago there was no proper retrofit plan in place. As has been said, it was hit and miss. It is very easy now to ask why it is not perfect or why it was not all done yesterday. Considering the plan has only been properly funded for the past two and a half years, it is amazing what has been achieved and rolled out nationwide. I have seen it at first hand and heard it from people first hand.

It is easy to poke holes in things. It is ironic that people who have never asked for retrofit funding before now have a better solution than everybody else for how it should have been done. I acknowledge the hard work that has been done by the Department, the funding that has been provided for the first time ever and the fact that the challenge is being taken seriously.

Sometimes I see that we are getting it right at a national level but issues arise when it comes down to either local level or the individual companies. The funding is not always the full solution. I would love to know if local authorities are given targets for how much social housing stock they should retrofit, based on percentages each year. If we do not give people targets, they may not have a clear aim. In County Clare, a good bit has been done in Shannon, for example, although I do not have the figures. We often hear that some local authorities are brilliant while others are bad at various things. I would love to see a proper target and an expectation for each local authority so that they prioritise the retrofit of social housing stock.

I sometimes think we are missing a piece in regard to people who contact me who have old stone cottages. Two cases I am aware of involve men who are both elderly and both have cancer. Having waited for an awful long time, they have been visited by company representatives who told them they were sorry but they could not do anything for them. I do not think that is acceptable. I do not know how we are going to follow up with those individual companies to ask why they told the men there was nothing they could do for them. If nothing else, they could at least insulate the attic. There is always something these companies can do, for example, external wall insulation. I do not accept that people should be told there is nothing that can be done for them. One house had a BER of G. Such houses are falling through the gaps. Companies should not be allowed to tell people who have been waiting for ten months that they are sorry but they cannot help them.

I know there is a delay because of the level of interest in the scheme. Success breeds delays. The way it works at the moment is that a house gets a BER rating and if it qualifies, the company does the work. Sometimes we hear of people who might be more vulnerable than others but they still have to wait for ages just to get a building energy rating. Would the Department consider doing a lot more BERs to find out where the worst houses are and then decide how to prioritise which is retrofitted first? Does Mr. Deegan know what I mean? If we take it on a first-come first-served basis only, we will not necessarily deal with the coldest houses first. There are G-rated houses in which people with disabilities and long-term ailments or very old people are living. I have had lots of older people come to me. I do not know if we have got this right yet. There is always room for improvement, if the witnesses know what I mean. If those people have to wait for ages while people with fewer energy issues are having retrofits done first, how do we make sure we are getting the most vulnerable first?

Wind energy was raised by Senator Burke, who is no longer present. My brother-in-law is a lecturer in energy engineering. He installed hydro, solar and wind in his own house. The reason there is not funding for micro wind generation is that it is not half as useful as solar. The reason we have focused all our energy on solar is that it works all year around and it does not have to be windy. I have a degree in maths and physics. It is just science. In this country, solar is the best way to get as much energy as possible into domestic houses and buildings. We did not decide for no reason to ignore wind and invest in solar. Lots of very clever people know a lot more than Senator Burke or I do about energy efficiency. That is why solar is promoted.

It would be good to see more education taking place. We have got funding on a national level. We have community climate action officers in every local authority but I do not see them doing outreach or education. I think there is a gap there. People still need to learn how to do these things. It has already been mentioned how confusing certain things are for people. There are simple tricks that people are not aware of yet. This sounds very simplistic but everybody should use the plugs with timers. They are very easy to use. Everybody should be using them because night-time rates are half the price. People can set their washing machine, dishwasher or tumble drier – the big energy guzzlers – to run after midnight. It would be a simple thing to send two of those plugs to every household in Ireland. It is a very low-cost measure and if people used them – they are very easy to understand – they would be much more effective.

I am sorry to say to Mr. Deegan that nobody knows about the energy kits. It is very hit and miss with local authorities. I know about them in County Clare because I heard a councillor in Dublin talking about them being in the libraries there and I found out they are in libraries in Clare. There are five kits in Clare. I have seen the kit and it is not easy to use. People need to learn from other people. Community climate action officers have to do more outreach. I referred to the waiting list, which I think Deputy Moynihan will also speak to, and how the most vulnerable are to be prioritised if we get stuck doing deep retrofits before all the BERs have been done.

What do I say to these two older men who have cancer? They have been told by two companies that they have a BER of G and the companies cannot do anything for them. These are the people we want to help.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I acknowledge that nothing is perfect. There is always room for improvement and we are always learning. This is an iterative process and nobody has actually done it before. Nobody has retrofitted the proportion of the housing stock that we are talking about doing in as short a space of time as we are doing it in. We are learning from international experience and from our own experience. We are coming up with new actions on an annual and ongoing basis as part of the climate action plan.

Regarding local authority housing stock, the overall target is 30,000 homes to be retrofitted by the end of-----

I am interested in the target per local authority. The national targets do not affect local authorities.

Mr. Robert Deegan

What the Senator is saying about different local authorities having different rates of retrofitting is the lived experience. Our colleagues in the Department of housing have policy responsibility for that area so it would be for that Department to set the individual targets.

We have a climate action plan. If that is an issue for the Department of housing, then it might be no harm to set targets at local authority level as well.

Senator Garvey, I will let you back in to ask a supplementary question but I would ask that you allow Mr. Deegan to finish first.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Regarding traditional buildings, the case of the two gentlemen referred to by the Senator is a sad one. Traditional buildings are particularly tricky to treat. They are often built with stone, clay, and lime-based mortar and one cannot use the standard insulation on the walls that one would use with a modern building. The walls behave in a different way because they are made of different materials. This has been a problem for a number of years and the issue has been growing. The good news is that just before Christmas our colleagues in the heritage side of the Department of housing published guidelines for upgrading-----

That was the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Yes. He launched the report. We were involved, as were the SEAI and officials from the Department of heritage. Those guidelines are in place now and we have asked the SEAI to work out what changes to the schemes will be required. In the first instance, we are probably going to pilot something because we need to make sure that what we do is correct. If things go wrong with a traditional building and we do the wrong thing, they can go badly wrong. There is no NSAI Agrément certified wall insulation available that I am aware of and they are the technologies that are supported through the SEAI. If there are innovative products that we need to consider, we will keep in touch with the SEAI in that regard. There is a set of guidelines there now that we can move on from.

I presume those gentlemen were visited by contractors under the warmer homes scheme. That scheme has a list of measures and contractors will not do wall measures because there is not an approved technology for that. However, they should look at things like attic insulation, as the Senator said herself. It could be the case that the home already had attic insulation. I am not sure of the specific circumstances but if the Senator wants to give us the details, we can follow up with the SEAI and see what the story is in that case.

There is going to be a real focus on traditional buildings because we need to have solutions for every consumer cohort and every housing type. I mentioned that we are doing work on apartments. The traditional building stock is a big cohort of houses that we cannot leave behind. We cannot leave the rental sector behind either. We are going to have to use different strategies to address these different sectors and that is an absolute focus for the Department.

Senator Garvey mentioned the need for prioritisation and I am happy to report that we have introduced prioritisation under the warmer homes scheme. Once applicants get through the initial threshold of satisfying the criterion of being in receipt of certain social welfare payments, the next stage is the BER. If the dwelling gets a BER of E, F, or G, it will be prioritised because it is in the worst-performing home category. Homes with a BER of E, F or G are the worst-performing homes and they are prioritised by the SEAI.

On the energy kits, what the Senator said is the first negative thing I have heard about them, other than a lack of availability. That is certainly something we can feed back. They have been very well received according to the feedback we have heard.

If people know about them.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Maybe that is the problem. Maybe more people need to know about them but that is something we are open to working on with our colleagues.

There is always room for improvement but the Department is facing a huge challenge. We have had badly-built houses here for many years. I did up an old cottage myself 20 years ago and did a hemp and lime plaster render on the inside. It should not take too long. I do not know why we need pilots. I know plenty of people who have been doing it for 20 years and more. I calculated the U values myself and it is not rocket science. I am hoping there will not be too much of a delay in that traditional area. That brings me to the issue of recognised prior learning. If one looks at the SEAI recognised workers, they are all electricians, plumbers and so on. The SEAI does not recognise people who have been plastering with hemp, thatching roofs and so on. I thatched the roof and plastered the walls. It was a deep retrofit of a very old cottage and I did it myself. It was a cosy, warm, B-rated home by the end of the process, with none of the modern stuff involved. Lots of people have been doing this for a long time and we will have to recognise their prior learning and get them to lead the way in the traditional field, instead of modern companies who claim to be good at things like hemp plastering. We are seeing a lot of Johnny-come-lately types who are claiming to be experts. It would be really important to recognise the people who have been using these traditional skills for many years and to let them lead the way on this. The education and communication aspects are very important. If we are paying people to have these jobs in local authorities, it would be great to see them involved. It would be great to get the Department to make sure they are reaching out and educating people because this is new for people.

Mr. Robert Deegan

There is some outreach going on. I was talking to colleagues in the SEAI the other day who are going to local libraries to talk to communities about energy saving and the options available to people who want to retrofit. There are also community-based social marketing events that the SEAI is overseeing. They are actually going into communities and where possible, they are bringing people into homes that have been retrofitted so that they can really experience the difference. There is nothing like seeing it for oneself and that is particularly true with heat pumps. Even though heat pump technology has been around for years, it still quite a new thing to a lot of people. That is changing but until one actually gets to experience it, one might be a little hesitant about making the investment.

In terms of new builds, virtually every house is going to have a heat pump from next year. Around 96% of houses built last year had heat pumps and that will reach 100%. More and more people are going to get to experience this and see how comfortable it is. Very rarely do you hear people giving out about retrofitting after they have done it. Once they experience it, hopefully a snowball effect will be generated, which will be supported by the various initiatives that are brought in by the Government.

Thanks. Senator Wall is next.

I welcome our guests today. I wish to raise an old chestnut. Representatives of the SEAI were before us last week and I raised the issue of housing grants. I acknowledge that the Department of housing is not before us today but I seek a comment on this from the Department of the environment. The issue raised with me most commonly is that of grants for windows and doors. I asked the SEAI if there was a stand-alone grant available for people who do not qualify for the housing aid grant available from the Department of housing. I am interested in the Department's view on this because I am coming across a lot of people who are not 66 years old, who are living in homes where the windows are literally falling out but who have no way of replacing those windows. Is the Department looking at providing a grant for this? We were told a review is ongoing and we are still awaiting the results of that.

I want to go back to the issue of heat pumps, which others have mentioned already. When a heat pump is installed in a local authority house, should the house also be insulated and the windows and doors upgraded? In some cases, it seems that heat pumps are being installed without the full package of retrofit measures. Is that a waste of resources? I ask our guests to comment on that. I know of some local authority houses where the full package of measures is done but I have also had people come to me who had a heat pump installed but their windows and doors are not fit for purpose. Is that a waste of money?

It is unfortunate that we do not have the Department of housing before us today. I invite our guests to comment on the figures that have been provided on the Department's website for local authority houses.

In regard to the amount spent per unit, County Louth spends €6,105, whereas County Kildare spends €3,218 per unit. What controls and inspections are done by each Department to ensure taxpayers get the best bang for their buck and that the local authority tenant, in particular, gets a house that is fit for purpose? It seems to me there is a vast difference in the amount of money being spent per unit in those two local authorities. However, this is the issue regarding housing aid grants, windows and doors grants, as well as the fact that those aged under 66 in private homes cannot get a grant.

As has been mentioned, we were told the last day that the inspections for the warmer home scheme take place after 20 months and after ten months for other inspections with the SEAI. I asked this question the last day but has the Department any plans to improve that? How can we improve it? Even though it has come down from 26 months it is still an awfully long time for people to wait to improve the quality of their home.

Mr. Robert Deegan

On grants for windows and doors, these are available under the national home energy upgrade scheme, which is the deep retrofit. That is part of a package, as opposed to an individual grant. It is also available under the warmer homes scheme in certain circumstances. That is where insulation measures are being put in place and there is only single glazing in the home prior to the works. It is not available as an individual grant currently. The measures that are supported are the most cost-effective measures in terms of bang for buck. Wall insulation measures, as opposed to windows and doors, have been the focus. We could spend a great deal of our budget and not get as good a return on it. Were we to make windows and door grants available, we would be inundated with requests for them. That would be to the detriment of installing wall and attic measures. They are the most cost-effective measures. That is why they are the focus for the individual grants.

The Senator mentioned the local authority heat pumps. Obviously that is a matter for the Department of housing but my understanding is that the heat pumps will only be installed in homes that are suitable for a heat pump. We can certainly feed it back to colleagues in the Department of housing but it might best to discuss it with them. We do not have any oversight of the local authority schemes in terms of inspections or anything like that. Unfortunately, I cannot help the Senator on that front today.

On the waiting list for homes, which was the final question, there have been significant improvements in the waiting lists under the warmer homes scheme from 26 months in 2022 to 20 months last year. That was driven by a number of measures. There were enhanced staffing allocations for the SEAI to increase its capacity to oversee matters. There were supports for supply chain and more cash flowing, which allowed the companies to grow and to take on bigger allocations. There was also the overall allocation itself which as I mentioned earlier, increased from €40 million in 2019 to €208 million this year. There is also a new tender. The SEAI has a panel of contractors that carry out works under the warmer homes scheme. The recent tender process was for €700 million ex VAT for the next four years. That resulted in 36 contractors being appointed. That is seven more than was previously the case. That will expand the capacity of the scheme. In addition to that, as much as is available through the tendering rules and procurement rules, those contractors can then subcontract to other contractors to ensure that the maximum supply can be delivered.

To give an idea of the expenditure, last year it was €157.4 million. That is a significant increase in expenditure. Output was 5,900 houses which is a 33% increase on 2022 numbers. While the waiting list reduced last year, I do not want to give false comfort on that, as demand for this scheme is huge. A number of factors influence that. There is much greater awareness of the scheme and of the importance of energy efficiency. However, we are also making the retrofits much better, which means they are much more attractive to the homeowners. I mentioned a figure in my opening statement that in 2015 the average upgrade was worth €2,600. The average grant last year was worth €24,000. That is only likely to increase as more of those houses trigger the building regulations. Demand is very high. We had 12,000 applications last year. There is a real challenge there but the main challenge we have is the supply chain's capacity to deliver more houses and the fact that demand outstrips supply at the moment. There has been a concerted effort to address these waiting lists. Good progress was made last year.

Does Senator Wall have anything to add?.

I thank the Chair. I will leave it at that for today.

I acknowledge the huge progress that has been made. Mr. Deegan referred to the waiting times for getting the work done on those different retrofitted homes. This is phenomenal work. It is not just the speed or the time but that it is meaningful change in a household. I acknowledge that. There is large demand on the scheme as well. The wait time to get to the starting line is the big issue, in our experience. Nothing starts until the BER certification is obtained. As outlined, matters are prioritised from there, in the case of homes that are identified as being at building energy rating, BER, of F or G. There are homes where, on walking into the yard, are obviously at a BER rating of Z, before anything is done. They are not going to be identified for at least another winter, after a decision has been made by the homeowner to do an upgrade. When the BER certificate is obtained there is prioritisation but before that, there is not. The energy seems to be focused on getting more contractors to get the work done after that, but we are still missing out on that initial gap of ten months in the cases of those most vulnerable households. These are people who it can clearly be seen need an energy upgrade. They are not going to qualify for a BER rating of E, F or G. They are identifiable. We are trying to understand the effort to resolve that first winter. Once the decision is made that the place is going to be upgraded by the householder and the application is in, are efforts being made to get those BER certifications sooner to allow householders to get to the starting line and be recognised as the most vulnerable and the most in need? Are efforts being made to contract out the BER certification in order that people who have those lowest ratings would be identifiable in less than a year and not have to face another winter when the decision to upgrade is made?

Mr. Robert Deegan

To give a breakdown of the process first of all, applications are dealt with on a first-come-first-served basis and then prioritised on the basis of the BER. For a pre-works BER, the waiting time is approximately eight to ten months. Then the survey waiting time is 14 months from application. The time till work is completed last year was 20 months, this year it will probably be a little longer. There then will be a post-works BER to be completed after that.

In regard to contracting out the BER certification, that is the way the process works at the moment. My understanding is that an updated tender will be under way shortly which will expand the capacity to do that kind of work around the BERs, the surveys and inspections.

That area has been identified as one where some work could be done, and the SEAI will be taking steps in that regard. The challenge is that demand for the scheme has exploded for the reasons I mentioned. We are trying to break the problem into its component parts and come up with the best possible solution for each of those problems. We started at the end of the pipeline as the Deputy suggested, in terms of contractors and expanding the tender framework. Some 36 homes were the outcome of the tender. We would have been happier had that figure been 50, but only 36 applied for it and got through the process. It will be the same now moving back to the start of the process with the BERs and surveys, expanding the capacity and prioritising those homes as much as possible, while making sure people do not get left forever when they apply for something. That would not be ideal. Homes that maybe are not a priority are still in need of work. Again, this is an area we are looking at. Nobody is saying things are perfect. There is always room for improvement and this is an area we will have to improve in the period ahead.

It is interesting to hear the figure of between eight and ten months. In our experience, it is greater than that. It is closer to one year for people we are dealing with in Cork. It is positive that the Department is looking at bringing in people to do the BER certification because that is the bottleneck. It gets people as far as the starting line and identifies who has the lowest rating and who is more vulnerable and most in need. Is the Department setting a target for those BER certifications with the new contract? If it is lining up people to come in to do those BERs, are they being told they have to be done within three weeks of application or are they being let work their way through? Is the Department setting clear and determinable targets, so that the more vulnerable people will be identified quickly?

Mr. Robert Deegan

It is the SEAI, as opposed to the Department, that would be carrying out the procurement process. I have not actually seen the tender documents. I think it is in everyone's interest, including the successful tender, to get as much work as possible done as quickly as possible because payment is made on the basis of the work done. Everyone's interests are aligned in ensuring that people get through the pipeline as quickly as possible. However, while it can be frustrating to be left waiting to get the BER stage done, if we move that forward there will still be a long gap between then and when people get the home done, just because-----

There is, but the more vulnerable are more easily identifiable. They are the ones that are moving, as opposed to anyone with a B or C rating. It is those with the lower BERs that are moving once they get the BER certificate.

Mr. Robert Deegan

Absolutely, and that is why there is a real focus on that now. We expect some improvement on that, but it again comes down purely to the volume of applications. If there are 12,000 applications in one year, that is 12,000 BER certificates that need to be done. There is a limited number of BER assessors in the country. There has been a significant expansion in the number of assessors. However, this is an area we will have to continue focusing on as demand for the scheme continues to grow.

Will there be targets set for the SEAI on those?

Mr. Robert Deegan

I will have to come back on that. There are targets set for outputs at the end of the year. What we are absolutely focused on is making sure we are pushing through as many houses as possible while using the prioritisation. There are enough homes coming through the application process and meeting the priority criteria at the moment. We are trying to speed everything up to the greatest extent possible. If the SEAI recognises barriers that the policy side in the Department can help with, there is an open door. We meet with it more than weekly at official level, but we are also-----

The barriers we are identifying are that the more vulnerable-----

Will the Deputy let Mr. Deegan answer? We are under pressure for time.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I was about to say that there is also a formal monthly meeting at which we review progress. It is a performance assurance meeting with the director of national retrofit, all of the teams and me. We go through all of these issues and identify the barriers. We then work collaboratively in a positive way to try to overcome as many of those barriers as possible.

I will be brief because I am sure a lot of what I have to say has been covered. There is the HAOP scheme, which is housing aid for older people. I deal with a fair number of older people with very poor houses. Before you do a BER rating, you have poor windows, poor doors and poor fabric. Before you do any insulation you have poor roofs and so on. The maximum grant, certainly in Galway, is €8,000 and there is a big demand for it. It is quicker than waiting for 20 months. Has the Department had any discussions with the Department of housing about increasing the amount of grant aid to do these basic things, and let the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications do the top-up measures that will bring these homes up to very good energy efficiency? A home might have timber doors that were fitted 40, 50, 60 or 70 years ago. I had a few houses that have applications in with the Department in the long run, but the local authority is dealing with crazy stuff in the first place. These houses are probably not measurable on the BER rating. Have there been any discussions to enable the local authorities, at least for the oldest cohort of people, to do a lot of the basic work that needs to be done on the worst of houses in our housing stock?

I see that 2,545 local authority-owned houses were upgraded under the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage local authority energy efficient retrofitting programme. Does Mr. Deegan have any idea how many houses we have in total with a BER rating below B2? Can we divide one into the other to tell us how many years it will take us to sort those houses out? Again, these are some of the poorest houses in the country because some local authority houses go back as far as the thirties. I have heard people talk about the fifties and sixties. These houses are very old and have served people very well, but they need upgrading.

There was a lot of talk about stuff in libraries and how people can save money. If people have an orderly life, of course they can. However, a lot of people we deal with have fairly chaotic lives and there are children and so on. I remember as a child being told to turn off the light. We were conscious of the cost of energy in those days. As Mr. Deegan knows, in particular when there are children around, good energy behaviour might not be so easy all of the time. We read every day in our newspapers about people who have generally disrupted lives. It is fair to say that they are unlikely to be going down to the library to learn about this, but they are probably the people in the greatest poverty. The one thing that could make a difference for them is a house with a good thermal quality.

Mr. Robert Deegan

A couple of those questions are more suited to the Department of housing but I will do my best to answer them.

I am asking what discussions Mr. Deegan's Department has with the Department of housing. The problem I always find with the State is that it operates in silos, as if there were 15 - or now 18 - Governments. There is only one Government and there is only one Oireachtas. My question was about what discussions the Departments have had.

Mr. Robert Deegan

On housing aid for older people, I have not raised with the Department of housing that it would do a block of work. However, to reassure the Deputy, we have good and ongoing conversations with the Department of housing for a couple of reasons. First, it is responsible for local authority housing stock, and we have overall responsibility for the retrofit targets. The second is that it is responsible for building regulations, in particular the major renovation part of those.

That is the bit that is focused on energy efficiency and retrofitting in particular. Finally, it also has overarching responsibility for the energy performance of buildings directive, which we had a key role in helping to negotiate and deliver.

In terms of local authority housing and the need for retrofits, there is a commitment in the climate action plan that 30,000 homes will be upgraded by the end of the decade. I think there is an acknowledgement that this does not cover all of the houses that need to be retrofitted in the local authority housing stock. More work is going to have to be done in the years beyond 2030 to ensure all of the homes are brought up-----

Would it be 100,000?

Mr. Robert Deegan

I do not know whether 100,000 need to be upgraded. They are all at different levels. I do know they are moving to a planned approach to maintenance and upgrade. In order to do that, you first have to know exactly what the housing stock is like. As I understand it, we are in the middle of a process of getting a much better picture of what their housing stock actually looks like at national and local authority level. That will allow the local authorities to better target and to ensure that the houses that really need the works are done. The people who really have the expertise in this are the local authorities. I know that councillors at local level will engage with the local authorities to ensure that attention is brought to the councils about the housing areas that need to be focused on.

There is also a BER map where we can see, geographically and colour-coded, the good and better performing parts of the housing stock and the bits that are really in need of work. In many cases, these are the mixed tenure estates where all the houses were owned by the local authorities at one stage but many of them have been bought out. It is often the people in the private houses in those housing estates who are least able to upgrade their properties. The local authorities pay for everything in terms of the upgrade for the local authority housing stock. Those in the private houses may not be eligible for the warmer homes scheme so that means they may have to make a contribution and may not be in a position to do that. Hopefully the loan scheme will help to fill the gap where people do not meet the criteria for the warmer homes scheme. The option is the fully funded upgrade for people who are eligible for that scheme. The Deputy mentioned people who need a little bit of extra help in managing their energy use and making a decision to go through the process of upgrading.

That was not the point. The point I made was that it is very unlikely, no matter how much help they are given, because not everybody accepts help or can assimilate help. Those cases need to be given more priority to get the buildings right.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I was just about to address the experience of the warmth and well-being scheme. That scheme focused on certain community health organisation areas in Dublin. It was for people with particular respiratory conditions. One of the lessons that were learned from it was the importance of inter-agency working between the SEAI, the contractors and the HSE. The HSE is trusted for a lot of houses, with HSE staff visiting people in their homes in some instances. It is a trusted party that homeowners listen to in some instances, whereas they will not listen to the likes of me or the SEAI because they do not even know who we are. They do know the HSE, however, and that the HSE is looking after their best interests. One of the lessons that has been mainstreamed following the warmth and well-being scheme is that when the HSE identifies homes at local level that could use these interventions, it can encourage and support the homeowners to apply for the scheme. It is having additional supports for people who need that help while going through the process of retrofitting their homes and applying to retrofit their homes.

There are cohorts that are really hard to reach. We will have to have strategies for dealing with those cases too. When people apply to the warmer homes scheme, the difficulty in not the consideration of who gets prioritised but the prioritisation approach I mentioned around being eligible, in the first instance, because people receive social welfare payments and, in the second instance, because they live in the worst performing homes.

Another lesson learned from the warmth and well-being scheme, or part of the outcome from that, related to contractors listening to the HSE about how to communicate and what the needs of these hard-to-reach people are, and then the HSE listening to the SEAI and the contractors in terms of what these interventions are and how they can benefit the health and well-being of the people who were in receipt of those measures. It is a very challenging issue but we are going to have to continue to work on ensuring that we have the strategies in place so that these people do not get left behind. From a just transition perspective, we need to ensure that does not happen.

I have a couple of brief questions. I want to correct the record as regards the funding. In January 2018, under Project Ireland 2040, significant capital funding was set aside for retrofitting homes, with a target of 45,000 homes per annum. Of course, Covid caused a problem after that. I do not want the impression to be given that there was no funding commitment until recently.

We had the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland before the committee. Supplementary evidence provided by the SEAI indicated that 55% of the cancellations over the last three years were because no works were possible, or they were not technically possible. This is a substantial amount of works that were not carried out. It contradicts Mr. Deegan's statement, which I believe is correct, that there are always works that can be carried out on homes. It may be replacing energy efficient lightbulbs, fitting lagging jackets, sealing up draughts or insulating an attic. There are always works that can be carried out, yet the SEAI is telling us it walked away from 55% of those applications, covering 1,590 homes of some of the poorest people in Ireland. I do not think that is right. There needs to be a mechanism such that in those circumstances, as is stated Department policy, we carry out retrofitting at a standard that is related to fairness and universality and that is consumer-centric. That is not happening for those 1,590 people. It is a policy issue on which direction needs to be given to the SEAI. I fully accept that it may not be able to carry out a lot of the measures under the warmer homes scheme but it is not the case that none of them can be carried out.

On the issue of aggregation, there is a massive time lag. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan spoke about the problem in getting the BER assessment carried out but even getting to that, we are talking about ten months. It takes 14 months on average from the time someone makes the decision to have the works carried out on their home until the building energy assessment is completed. It is impossible to aggregate those cases until they have gone through the system. That is the reason for the current bottleneck, both in terms of processing the application and the energy assessment. Priority must be given to that. It could improve the efficiency in delivering projects. We could cluster an awful lot more together in an area. If you are going into an estate and doing five homes, but there are another seven or eight waiting 14 months for the BER to be completed, it makes no sense that they are not in the system as well. That bottleneck needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

The Department needs to sit down with the Department of housing to discuss having a co-ordinated strategy of retrofitting the homes of warmer homes scheme applicants and local authority tenants in the same estate. They can be done by the same contractor at the same time, which would save the local authorities a significant amount of money. The work is inefficient as the contractors are doing small-scale operations. That approach would ensure the works were being done in a more timely matter with greater co-ordination across the board.

Those are the key takeaways I would like the Department to look at in the short term to improve the efficiency of these schemes.

Mr. Robert Deegan

We have been discussing the cancellations with the SEAI and we know we need to improve on that. We would like to ensure that as few houses as possible fall into that category. We can commit to further discussions on that with a view to moving things on.

In terms of aggregation, we will be raising with the SEAI the bottleneck in the BER process. The more information we have the better. The requirement for the BER certificate was only introduced about a year ago. As this is a relatively new requirement, the system is kicking into gear to be able to deliver a greater number of BER assessments to inform-----

It is still taking ten months and it should not take ten months.

Mr. Robert Deegan

That is why the further we can bring it forward the better. We will certainly talk to the SEAI about that.

On the co-ordinated approach between the local authorities on the warmer homes scheme and SEAI schemes more generally, it is a really tricky problem. We tried to do a retrofit scheme in the midlands a few years ago. Without getting too bureaucratic about it, there were all kinds of problems. There were procurement rule problems and challenges with oversight. There have been examples of this being successful. The SEAI worked with Cork City Council a number of years ago. There is a project under way in Fingal County Council. We really need examples of where it works so we are then able to show other local authorities how to overcome those challenges leading to positive outcomes for everyone.

The local authorities are concerned about private homeowners in poor housing. Obviously, however, their focus is on the local authority housing stock. If we can show tangible examples where it is a win-win for the local authority side and the private housing side, everybody is absolutely on board in delivering that. It is just a matter of practical challenges. One of those practical challenges relates to people who are not eligible for the warmer homes scheme and whether they have the funding available to do it. It is definitely something we are actively working on because better levels of aggregation facilitate better energy efficiency and economies of scale. We want to do this. It is just a question of coming up with the correct mechanisms and processes that can actually deliver.

I wish to apologise. I have had a very busy morning and so I have not been able to engage until now. I heard the comments of the Chairman and Deputies Ó Cathasaigh and Ó Cuív. I fully back up what they said. I will be short because to avoid repetition. I welcome Mr. Deegan and thank him for his presentation. Many people are falling through the cracks here. They are mainly people who are not young anymore and whose housing is in a bad way. Deep retrofitting is out as far as I am concerned. Can we not go back to making sure that all the draughts in houses are eliminated and they have good doors and windows? If we want to get people an environmentally friendly burner for burning solid fuel, we should do that. The way this is moving at the moment, many of these people will never see anything done with their homes. That is a pity and a tragedy. We need to get this work done as quickly as possible. We need far more co-operation. I do not understand why everybody cannot work together on this. While the intentions are good and the SEAI does a lot of good work, we need to move on with this work because it is too slow.

I will cite a case in my county where two siblings are living together. One of them owns the house and the other is living in the house and on a social welfare work scheme. Despite providing proof through a signed letter confirming she was on that scheme, the SEAI is still not accepting their bona fides on this; I do not know why. This case has been going on for weeks and weeks. That is not to take from the good work being done by the SEAI, but the process is too slow. While retrofitting is fine for some houses, it is not practical for many others. Let us make the basic changes that need to be made, and give those people some comfort and care. We need to remember that many of the people we are dealing with are elderly.

Mr. Robert Deegan

I agree with the Senator's point about the need to support older people through the schemes. One of the primary avenues for people to access the warmer house scheme, which is the free energy upgrade, is through the fuel allowance. The vast majority of people who receive fuel allowance are older people. This is an avenue to that particular scheme.

The Senator mentioned the degree of prioritisation between the deep retrofits and the shallower retrofits. I return to the principle of universality and ensuring that all consumer segments and housing segments are captured. The better energy home scheme allows for that. It allows individual measures to be installed by homeowners at a time that they decide. The application process is instantaneous. People apply online and are told immediately that they qualify for the grant. They can then secure a contractor to do the work who can then do the work as quickly as possible. We fully appreciate that the deep retrofit will not be available to everyone. That is why the better home scheme is there. It provides very generous grants for people who are looking to do cavity and attic insulation. They can get grants for heat pumps if they want to move on to that. There are grants for external insulation, heating controls and other measures. Generous grants are available for those kinds of one-off individual measures as opposed to just the deep retrofit.

The Senator mentioned a particular case where somebody was deemed ineligible for a scheme. Obviously, I am not familiar with the particular circumstances. I do not know whether it was one of the eligible payments under the warmer homes scheme. A number of social welfare payments are not eligible for the warmer homes scheme. There is a new online portal. There are three options - people can ring the SEAI, write to it or use the online portal. People who are comfortable doing so can use the online portal to check their eligibility for the scheme. It is a direct link-up with the Department of Social Protection. It cuts out some of the bureaucracy for people who are happy to do things online. Of course, not everyone is and so other options are available for those consumers. If they are eligible, it would be very unusual for them to be told they are not eligible. If the Senator sends us the details, we can raise the case with the SEAI or he can raise it with the SEAI directly. There is an Oireachtas address for all queries that get fast-tracked.

I asked a question that was touched on but not answered. It was about the relationship between the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of housing. Mr. Deegan touched on it in some of his answers. Different local authorities tell me different things. However, they indicate that the funding they get from the Department of Housing is not adequate to meet the requirements on a unit-by-unit basis. It is efficient and possible to do it on a big block of apartments but on a unit-by-unit basis the numbers are not adequate to make it cost-effective given that costs have risen. I do not expect Mr. Deegan to say the Department of Housing is doing everything wrong. How much responsibility does the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications have? What is its role in driving the retrofitting in local authority housing? Is it primarily advisory or how does it work? What is the breakdown of responsibility?

Deputy Ó Laoghaire took the Chair.

Mr. Robert Deegan

My understanding of the local authority scheme is that it costs about €36,000 per unit, but some units will cost more and some will cost less. That allows the authority at local level to get a balance that means it stays within its budget. That is my understanding of how it works.

Our involvement with the Department of housing is an ongoing conversation. We obviously encourage the retrofitting of the maximum number of local authority units. Much of that is driven by the climate action plan commitment to retrofit 30,000 houses per year until the end of the decade. That will a subset of the overall number of upgrades that needs to be done, for which the target is 500,000 houses. It is ongoing. Our responsibilities cross over in a number of ways, as I mentioned, in terms of European directives, the building regulations and the terms of the local authority roll-out. Some of our schemes like the community energy grant scheme can also, in certain conditions and with the approval of the local authority and the Department of housing, include a small number of local authority units within community projects. Maybe they would not say it, but we would say it is a good relationship. It is a productive relationship that has seen good results in recent years. However, as with everything else related to this subject, there is always room for more to be done because there is such a need.

That concludes our business in public session. I propose that the committee go into private session to consider other business. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The joint committee went into private session at 11.42 a.m. and adjourned at 11.46 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 21 February 2024.
Top
Share