Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister's figures show that there has been a high uptake of the scheme with 68,000 individual pieces of work across 46,000 properties to a value of over €1 billion. Deputy Burton's proposal has merit. The Minister has mentioned problems related to the amendment and its uptake, but they have to be addressed within the scheme.

Interestingly, when one delves into the figures, one sees that 23% of the works are window replacements, 18% are kitchen renovations and so on. I support the scheme and its extension, but nearly one quarter of the works are window replacements. This scheme concerns labour intensive work, but the figure for home extensions is less than 10% and general repairs account for 13%.

The Government had two proposals at the time. One was to get many of those in the construction sector back to work, including window fitters. The other was to address black market activity. Going by what I have heard around the place, people do not take this option because the value of the work must be €4,405, excluding VAT. The uptake in the overall scheme is healthy, but let us take one county as an example. I could point to any, but there have only been 185 properties in Monaghan. In Wicklow, the number is ten times that. What is the reason for this? Is it because of lower incomes? Uptake is not evenly spread, and one would not imagine it would be, but it is heavily concentrated in Dublin and Cork, where the populations and higher value work are, for example, extensions and so on. There has been a relatively low uptake in certain counties: 175 properties in Longford; 162 in Leitrim, which is a small county; and 361 in my county of Donegal. This is over a period of three years. The threshold is still a barrier and should be reduced.

The scheme has worked well to date, but a cost-benefit analysis of it must be undertaken because we need to know the criteria on which it will be extended. My feeling is that it is going well and it is a good idea, but I would love to see more hard facts and data, for example, a cost-benefit analysis. I am concerned about the spread, though. It is not being taken up in many counties. In the past three years in Donegal, Monaghan and Leitrim, properties have been extended, windows have been replaced and doors have been done, but their uptake rates are being affected for some reason. Perhaps it is a lack of awareness of the scheme, a belief that it was not in the owners' interests or the fact that they have no tax liability.

The Government should consider reducing the threshold. I make this point in light of Deputy Burton's amendment. If the Minister is disposed to her amendment and given the fact that local authority tenants are improving houses that belong to the State, the threshold should be reduced for a start. We all know people who, having grown fed up with trying to get their local councils to fix leaky windows, front doors or whatever, have taken out credit union loans and done the work themselves. It does not cost €4,500, excluding VAT, but it does cost a certain amount, and a reduced threshold as a starting point would be one way of addressing this matter.

The number of contractors who have benefited from the scheme is interesting. While the number of works is 68,453, the number of contractors is 8,545. Repeat work is going to contractors. That is good, but one of the objectives was to try to get those involved in black market activity into the system. The figures are telling a bit of a story and the threshold is one of the problem's causes.