Neasa Hourigan (Dublin Central, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

There is significant appetite for this among the public. People tell me all the time that they want on-street charging. There is a significant appetite for it.

I want to move to the one-stop-shop programme. I am not sure which of our guests is best placed to respond on it. A constituent of mine has had work done under the programme. Obviously, it is great to have a one-stop-shop model. The constituent has a concern regarding the transparency of the programme. The homeowner asked SEAI for details on what work on his or her home is being claimed for, when inspections are happening and the quantum of the grant provided. The SEAI responded that due to the general data protection regulation, GDPR, it cannot discuss the status of an application with the homeowner. Why can a homeowner not get details from the SEAI in respect of work being carried out on his or her home? If there is a dispute between the one-stop shop and the homeowner, for example, simply telling the homeowner to trust the one-stop shop is problematic for the homeowner if there is an opaqueness there. I appreciate that the contract is between the one-stop shop and the SEAI, but is there anything stopping the SEAI including in those contracts that it will share details on progress and other relevant matters with the homeowner? Why is a layer of opaqueness being added to the one-stop-shop process?