Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The responses have been very interesting. I am feeling slightly awkward because some of my questions are probably more for the Department, which is not represented. I do not want to ask the witnesses from SEAI questions about matters that are outside its remit but I also do not want to ask questions that repeat what their colleagues have told our colleagues in the other committee today. I will run through some of these questions and ask the witnesses to share whatever knowledge they have with us. For those of us who have been on this committee for long time, tackling the housing crisis was our big priority for a number of years. It was all about the number of units. Thankfully, most of us have shifted and it is no longer just about the number of units but the quality, energy efficiency and carbon output of the units.

Since we have not been involved in the finer details of the Oireachtas Committee on Environment and Climate Action, some of us are still trying to work out what sectoral carbon budgets would look like in real life. Are the witnesses in a position to give the committee any insight? I do not really want to know what the targets are going to be. They will be decided by Government, which will announce them on the basis of advice from many organisations, including SEAI. Could the witnesses from the SEAI explain what this new process will look like in plain English for regular folks like us? I am of the view that it will fundamentally change the way people like us have been doing our work up to now and the better we understand that process, the more we can be properly informed. If there is any information the witnesses from the SEAI can share with us, it would be really helpful.

I understand fully the need for European-wide consistency, particularly given that so many of our construction industry inputs are produced here. That makes complete sense. There are some really simple things. We know there are new technologies to produce lower carbon cement, concrete and brick. We know that it costs roughly the same amount of money and that concrete producers in Ireland have technologies to do both. In the same way that we had a phase-out of gas boilers in houses from 2025 under nearly zero energy building, NZEB, we need to start having public conversations on the fact that we have the technology for lower carbon cement and concrete in this country and it costs the same. Given that fact, should we not be looking for an accelerated phase-out of higher carbon concrete? Is this part of the discussions in which SEAI is involved or the witnesses from SEAI are hearing from colleagues in terms of embodied carbon? The reason I ask is that I agree it would be much better to use as many of the existing buildings as possible and repurpose, refurbish and retrofit and, where that is not possible, to re-use materials.

We also know what the Government's targets are. The Government's housing plan talks about around 2,500 vacant and derelict units being brought back into stock through compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, by local authorities over the next four to five years. There is talk of using another mechanism called Croí Cónaithe towns to get access to some vacant units but there is no real target yet. On the basis of the targets in front of us, there will be nowhere near as many repurposed vacant and derelict properties as SEAI or many members would like. For this reason, whatever the number of new builds, we need to try to reduce the embodied carbon in them. What are the witnesses' thoughts on the issues around cement and phasing out higher carbon concrete and cement?

Likewise with timber, Deputy Duffy, who has a master's degree in architecture and timber construction, and I have had a lot of conversations. For five or six years, the Government has spoken about promoting new construction technologies and modern methods of construction. A small number of companies produce very high-quality products here with embedded and NZEB passive and passive plus products but despite all the talk and hard work of a small number of people in industry, very little has been done on scale. Again, I invite the witnesses from SEAI to express their views, concerns and frustrations about any of that if they are in a position to do so.

I have a particular, some would say obsessive, interest in building control. We must have really good building regulations. Our problem concerns monitoring and enforcing them. The NZEB regulations came in for public and private buildings but I am still very confused as to how we are adequately monitoring them. There is ping-pong between the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage on which one is monitoring them. Of course, we were told it would be a matter for assigned certifiers and building control. Is anybody keeping an eye on the NZEB portion in terms of compliance separate from ordinary building control?

Is anybody looking at that? Is it all going fine? Are there concerns, etc?

Last, on the targets, a recent parliamentary question to the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications asked the number of successful applicants to the warmer homes scheme who have been waiting more than two years. I have heard everything the SEAI has said on the increased budgets and the work they are doing do with contractors, which is welcome. Obviously, there will be a clearing of the backlog and then there will be the new entrants to the scheme. Can the witnesses give us a little bit more detail about how they hope to clear that backlog of 7,000 applicants? This is if the SEAI has that information to hand. If they do not, I can take it from the minutes of the other relevant committee. We are all keen to see that work happen as speedily as possible. Therefore, it is not just about meeting this year's targets, but last year’s, and the years before that fell short. Can we meet and then accelerate the targets, so that we can catch up over a couple of years? Does that make sense as a question?