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

I thank our guests for their presentations. Sometimes when we are discussing very technical matters, we can sound very dull. That is a mistake in this instance because I think the conversation we are having today, and the one we had in our most recent meeting, are an enormous opportunity. We need to reignite some of the excitement about it. Deputy McAuliffe is absolutely right that we need to consider lessons from our own past. We can, however, also look at some of the exciting buildings that are being built with new building technologies around Europe at the moment. Not only are they cutting edge and fast to produce but they provide very good quality homes in communities with much lower embodied carbon. There is such exciting stuff happening.

I will bring three projects to the attention of the committee. Mr. Stevens will know the low impact living affordable community, LILAC, in Leeds, which comprises 20 units of low-impact and low-carbon community-led housing. It provides a wonderful model for how this could work. On a much larger scale, Dalston Works in London is ten storeys tall and comprises 121 apartments. It is almost all cross-laminated timber. That is cutting-edge building technology. The best example, and one I have previously mentioned at this committee, is a Barcelona development, La Borda, which comprises 28 or 30 apartments and some co-working space. Not only has it an energy efficiency to die for in respect of embodied carbon, it was 30% cheaper to produce, while not compromising on any standards, than a traditional apartment build of the same size and covering the same space. While Mr. Parlon is right that these units are not going to be any cheaper now, that is because we are not developing them at scale. If we were able to develop high-grade and low-carbon timber-based products at scale, not only would the build be high speed and low carbon, there would also be cost efficiencies, as well as the development cycle. This is such an important area that we should not get lost in the technicalities.

I have three specific questions and if there is not enough time now for everybody to respond, there will be a second round. My first question is for Mr. Browne. I agree with his broad presentation. In respect of the State's architecture policy and public procurement, what specifically can we do to ensure a mandated pipeline of contracts can be put in place? Perhaps Mr. Browne will go into a little more detail as to what he would like to see in that regard. It almost seems as if it is the pipeline we now need and the certainty that contracts will be made available to allow industry to scale up, year after year.

I have a question for Mr. Stevens and Ms McManus. I am interested in the overlap between architecture, building technology and that kind of community-led housing model, in terms of affordability. I know both Mr. Stevens and Ms McManus are involved in that. Perhaps they will share their thoughts.

I have to ask a difficult question of Mr. Parlon because at some point in the future, he will not be with us. An increasing use of timber and low-carbon technologies also means we have to use less of the high-carbon technologies, particularly dirtier cement. We have very good low-carbon cements but we need to start having a conversation with the cement industry. As we scale up timber and low-carbon technologies, how do we, in a structured and constructive way, shift the high-carbon building materials so that it is done in a planned manner without any disruption to jobs and economic activity? Perhaps we can have quick answers.