Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025 have been referred to this committee for consideration by both Houses of the Oireachtas. These regulations relate to exempted developments in respect of slurry storage and animal housing. I am pleased that we have the opportunity to consider them in the company of the Minister of State with special responsibility for local government and planning, Deputy John Cummins. I welcome him and his officials from the Departments of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Copies of the briefing note and the regulations have been circulated to members. To commence our consideration, I call on the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, to make his opening statement.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am joined by Mr. Brian Loughlin, assistant principal officer in the planning division, Mr. Paul Hogan, assistant secretary in planning, and Mr. Bill Callanan, from the environmental policy section of the Department of agriculture. I thank the committee for affording me the opportunity to present these proposed regulations.

The Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025 amend the planning and development regulations 2001, as amended, by: extending the provision for change of use from commercial to residential and vacant properties until 31 December 2028; increasing the provision of animal housing under class 6 of Part 3 by 50% from 200 sq. m to 300 sq. m and the total from 300 sq. m to 400 sq. m; and providing an exemption for stand-alone slurry storage of up to 1000 cu. m, subject to a farm limit of 1500 cu. m.

The Government is committed to providing supports to the farming community and measures that can assist in increasing the number of housing units available in the State. The draft regulations are being prepared under the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, as a priority of Government. When the new exempted development regulations are made under the Planning and Development Act 2024, the provisions as set out in the draft regulations before us will be replicated in any new regulations.

The aim behind the Planning and Development (Exempted Development (Act of 2000)) Regulations 2025 is to give certainty to the public. First, the provision for the change of use from commercial to residential is due to expire at the end of 2025. Amending Article 10(6) of the 2001 regulations will extend the relevant period until 31 December 2028. This will ensure that individuals can avail of the exemption without fear of enforcement. Protected structures are safeguarded under section 57 of the 2000 Act. Where works would materially affect a protected structure, exemptions are removed and planning permission is required.

Second, the provision to increase the exemption under class 6 of Part 3 of Schedule 2 to the 2001 regulations for animal housing by 50% supports increased animal welfare and takes account of changes in farming in the 24 years since the introduction of the exempted development provisions. As the increased area of 300 sq. m is equivalent to housing 38 dairy cows or 100 beef animals, this change is aimed at small and medium-sized farms. Increasing space per animal aligns fully with modern practices of increased space as a contributor to better animal welfare conditions.

Third, the provision of a new class 6A slurry tank exemption up to 1,000 cu. m, subject to an aggregated farm total of 1,500 cu. m, is to assist farmers in the storage and management of farm slurry and run-off. This change would allow a tank to be constructed without the provision of additional animal housing as part of the development. It allows for increased storage of manure and its application at the most opportune time when grass or crops are most actively growing.

Better use of slurry will provide for further displacement of chemical fertiliser purchases and allow improved management, thereby reducing the climate emissions associated with chemical fertiliser. It will also generate positive cost savings for farmers. Improved storage and management of manure reduces the loss of nutrients to water and delivers on the commitment of the Government in Water and Agriculture - A collaborative approach, which was published last year.

Under the European Union good agricultural practice for the protection of waters regulations, also known as the nitrates regulations, the rate of application of nutrients to agricultural land is strictly controlled. The timing and rates of organic nutrient application are controlled with the aim of minimising any potential impact on water quality and the environment. The provision of additional storage facilities enables farmers to apply slurry at times most beneficial to crop growth and development. As part of conditions associated with this new exemption class, it will be a requirement that all tanks are constructed in accordance with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine specifications for such structures, in addition to meeting all the conditions set out for exempted animal housing.

It is important, as with all planning exemptions, to note that where there is a requirement for an environmental impact assessment or appropriate assessment, the exemptions are removed and planning permission is required. In line with environmental obligations, these draft regulations are undergoing environmental consideration for strategic environmental assessment and appropriate assessment. The exemptions for agriculture are a priority for Government. They will reduce regulations for farmers in order to comply with the need for increased space for animals, address the requirements of the nitrates directive and build on the existing planning exemptions that are in place.

I commend the draft regulations to the committee. Having regard to the need to support the delivery of housing and in the context of the requirement to maintain and manage farm run-off, the regulations are intended to give certainty and clarity to farmers seeking to invest in their farms and improve water quality.

These draft regulations, if subsequently approved by a positive resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas, as is required under the planning Act, will come into force as soon as they are signed by me. If approved by the Oireachtas, it would be my intention to sign the regulations into law at the earliest opportunity following completion of the environmental assessment.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State very much. I will ask the members to make comments. The first to speak is Deputy Cooney. I thank Deputy Ó Broin for giving way for him to speak first.

Joe Cooney (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State and his team for coming in this evening to update us on exactly where we are. Again, I compliment him on in fantastic work he is doing. Residential accommodation is vitally important and hopefully, some of the guidelines the Minister of State has set out in front of us will help to put more residential units in place going forward. I have a couple of questions. How many units have been delivered under the commercial to residential exemption so far?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

These exemptions were introduced in 2018. In the period up to the end of 2024, which is the latest data we have, there were 1,457 notifications from developers intending to avail of the exemption. That equated to 3,429 houses across the country. A significant number of dwellings have been provided as a result of the exemptions that are in place, removing the need for people to go for planning when converting that commercial premises into much-needed housing for individuals and families across the country. It has been a success. It was due to expire at the end of this year, and that is why I am seeking to extend it to the end of 2028.

Joe Cooney (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is very good. We are all well aware of the number of people who are looking for housing. There is growth in our population, and the demand is there for housing. It is a fantastic to see that achievement over that short period. A lot of commercial buildings are probably laying idle in villages and towns as well. It is great to see them come back into use. Why put an end to the commercial residential exemption? Why not just allow it to exist forever? Why is the Minister of State putting a deadline on it?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is something that I will keep under review. The existing regulations had an end date of 2025. In amending that, we are trying to give certainty to 2028. As I said in my opening statement, these guidelines will have to be transferred under the 2024 Act and at that point, I will be able to remove the end date and keep the overall regulations under consideration in that space.

Joe Cooney (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is fine. Will the Minister of State consider increasing the number of units? Nine is the limit at the moment. Could that be increased to a higher number?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Nine is the total that can be converted under the existing regulations. We are giving certainty to the sector now by extending it out to 2028 and those are the regulations that have been in place since 2018. In 2022, we included former pubs into the exemption, which has been hugely successful. Nine is the number. We can keep it under review in the context of the 2024 Act and bringing in changes under it. As I indicated a couple of weeks age, we also have the domestic exemptions still to come before the Oireachtas and that team to appear before the committee. It is something I will take into consideration.

Joe Cooney (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That would be very good. It is important as well. As I said, we are well aware of the demand for residential accommodation. I thank the Minister of State.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Cooney asked two of the questions I was going to ask about the first of the regulations. I fully support the proposal. I would also be open to not having an end date. Obviously, there is a need to keep these things under review-----

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Of course.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----but if it is working and it is producing good-quality permanent homes for people, we would support anything that could make it easier for people to turn vacant properties, particularly above-the-shop units, into residential accommodation. We would support the Minister of State in that.

I have a number of technical questions. I better run through them all in one go and then he can reply to them as he wants. It is really just to help me and the wider public to fully understand the other proposed changes. The Irish Planning Institute made quite a detailed submission as part of the public consultation. Will the Minister of State respond to some of the issues it raised in its contributions?

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In reference to these exemptions we are talking about.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Only in reference to these exemptions, yes, absolutely.

With respect to the animal housing, the increase is an extra 150 sq. m. I do not have an issue with it, but are there typically conditions that are attached in terms of proximity to other structures and other buildings? The intention of this is not necessarily to increase the number of animals that are within them but to improve the conditions of them. Are conditions attached that stipulate that the size is increased in terms of the number of animals that are inside?

With respect to the slurry storage tank, I see clearly from the briefing that the idea of this is to ensure that the slurry is stored properly until the most optimal time. The Irish Planning Institute in its submission raised a concern that this may not be consistent either with the requirements of the nitrates directive or the Government's own climate action plan. I am not saying a agree or disagree with that, but it was a specific issue the institute raised. What can the Minister of State say to the committee to assure us that the stated intention of the regulation is what will transpire and that it will give out the safer storage of the slurry rather than greater use of and spread of slurry potentially at times of the year when it is suboptimal? Typically speaking, are there conditions attached to these? Can he share with the committee what those conditions may be?

He also mentioned that after the Oireachtas approves these and before he signs them, there will be completion of the environmental assessment.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can he give us a bit more information about that? Is there a reason the environmental assessment is not conducted prior to the bringing of the regulations to us? Again, this is just for my own information. The final two questions are on the other farming regulations. There was one on fencing, and anaerobic digestion. They are not being dealt with today. We are going to get those at a separate stage. Can the Minister of State give us any indication of the sequencing of the other regulations? We were just setting out our committee schedule for the remainder of this year. We have a heavy schedule of meetings. There were probably two or three pieces of primary legislation. We are all keen to schedule this to facilitate him. Is there any update on the scheduling of that because it does require at least an hour or hour and a half of committee time to get through them. Even if he does not have a sense of the scheduling, does he know the number of committee meetings he might require? Is he breaking them up into many sub-modules, if that makes sense?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy might help me in going back through some of those because there was a lot in there. The first question was on animal housing. The rationale is that the direction of travel is that we require more space for animals than what was there. These have not been updated in the past 24 years. It is a reasonable increase in terms of the space requirement that would be there. There are setback distances as part of the regulations, for example,100 m from a neighbour and 10 m from a road.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They do not change. They remain the same.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They do not change. They are in the existing regulations, which have been working well up to now. I do not see any need to change them.

On slurry storage, it is about the efficient management of slurry and manure on farms to ensure that they are used when it is the most appropriate time for them to be used. It is also about farmers having adequate capacity on their farms. It could be that one farmer wants to facilitate a neighbouring tillage farmer in the context of storing nutrient that they can spread on their land at the appropriate time. We appreciate that the measure we are bringing forward is significant. However, we also believe it is appropriate. It is not about intensification or increased production. We know this because the number of animals in the national herd has been relatively stable over the past number of years. There are additional requirements to come in terms of the capacity of storage required per animal. This is coming down the line, so we need to ensure that we have adequate storage in place. That is what we are seeking to do here.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is really helpful. While we are on this matter, I will ask a couple of follow-up questions. For those of us who cannot visualise 1,000 cu. m, do we have a sense of the size of that physically? That would be helpful. In the same way that conditions are attached in terms of setbacks, etc., for the animal housing, are there any conditions to be applied here? One of the things this committee often considers is the Environmental Protection Agency's report on water quality. Clearly, nitrates are not the only challenge in our water quality but, according to the recent EPA report, they are one of the challenges. Will there be any mechanism to try to make sure that the stated intention, as the Minister of State has set out, will be what transpires in practice? Again, if this assists in better management of slurry and a reduction in slurry being spread at suboptimal times, then that will be positive. Will there be some mechanism to try to assess that, in collaboration with the EPA, to ensure it has the intended impact?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Everything that is constructed for slurry storage capacity has to be done in accordance with Department of agriculture guidance that is in place. This is regardless of whether a farm is availing of a TAMS grant. That is there. On the nitrates regulations that are in place, there are setback distances in the same way there are for the housing of animals. With water quality in general, the EPA report that was published today shows that 52% are in compliance. At the same time, we did see some positive movement on the nitrates aspect within that, particularly in high-priority areas, including in my area of the south east and south west. We would expect to see a lot more of this improvement coming through in future reports because significant work has been done by farmers and by the agriculture sector in general in this space.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The next point was the completion of the environmental assessments prior to signing. Will the Minister of State explain what that is and why it is not done before these regulations are brought to us?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I had a judgment to make in relation to coming before the committee with the regulations that are before us. I could have waited until that process was fully completed, sought a meeting in the committee, which has a busy schedule, and then brought it before the Dáil and the Seanad. I am trying to move things along. I do not believe that everything has to always be done sequentially. This is an independent process that is ongoing in the background at the moment with regard to the environmental considerations as to whether the strategic environmental assessment or appropriate assessment would be required. I want to be in a position to sign these regulations should something come out of that process and to do so straight away, rather than seeking a meeting date with the committee, going through the process in that regard and then going before the Dáil and the Seanad. I do not want to waste any time, because this is really important in the context of retaining our nitrates derogation and enabling farmers to be able to invest in improving water quality on their farms.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does this mean that if the outcome of that environmental assessment involves negatives, the Minster of State would not be able to sign these regulations into statutory instruments?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputy say that again?

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When the Minister of State gets the environmental assessment, could there be outcomes that would prevent him from signing these regulations into law and that would mean he would have to do something additional in respect of them? This is just to give the committee a sense of what the assessment involves.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is very hard to say because that process is being done independently. There are a number of outcomes that could come from it, but I want to be in a position to be able to sign the regulations if there is no additional work required. If such work is requires, then it will have to be done before I can sign them.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have no challenge to any that. From a scrutiny point of view, however, it would be valuable, assuming that the exercise is finished, if the Department officials were able to provide the committee with a note on the outcome of that process or even a copy of the assessment. That would be useful. We are being asked to approve something in theory, by way of a motion in the Dáil tomorrow - and, again, I have no problem with that - without necessarily having sight of it. We have to give our imprimatur to tomorrow. The Minister gets the value of the outcome of the environmental assessment, so I think sending a note to the committee when it is complete would not be an unreasonable ask.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sure. We will take that away.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My final points were on the other farming regulations and the other regulations.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputy remind me?

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The fencing and the anaerobic digestion, which were covered in the public consultation.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Again, that comes into the sequencing of the additional regulations that I deal with in the previous question. It was a priority to be able to bring forward the aspect relating to slurry storage and animal housing as a result of the impact in the context of our nitrates derogation. It was a priority of the Government, and it is also a priority as one of the actions out of the collaborative report done last year, to bring forward stand-alone slurry storage. This is why I am acting to bring forward these regulations in advance of the others. It was a high priority for the Government that it be able to bring them forward. As I indicated a couple of weeks ago, I then intend to bring forward a series of thematic exemptions, the first of those being domestic exemptions. My officials are engaged in extensive work in that regard. I want to put on record my thanks to all the team. They are working night and day on these.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With the Chair's indulgence, can I ask whether the Minister of State knows the number of sub-themes that these are being broken into and whether there is an estimated timeline for the residential ones that are coming next?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Anything that I say here is obviously subject to change because-----

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not going to catch the Minister of State out. I am genuinely asking about the scheduling of this.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am hoping to bring forward the domestic ones this side of Christmas. We will then be into the new year in the context of deal with the next theme.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How many other themes will there be roughly?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Roughly, it will be four, five or six. It depends. We are still working on splitting them out.

PJ Murphy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for coming in and giving us these very clear explanations. I have three very simple questions that I will ask together. We are all very conscious of the connection between improved water quality and Ireland's request for the continued derogation. Is the Minister of State of the opinion that these measures, the agricultural measures for slurry storage, will assist in improving water quality? Will farmers be required to have additional slurry storage under the new nitrates rules? My third question relates to oversight. If something like this slurry storage facility is exempt, what protections are in place to ensure that these slurry storage facilities are constructed properly? What body has oversight in the context of ensuring that this happens and what are the oversight regulations to ensure that the construction is carried out correctly?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The answer to the Senator's first question is yes, I believe that these exemptions will have a positive impact on water quality. It is about ensuring, as I said, that we have adequate and sufficient storage on farms and that it is used at the appropriate time in order to reduce the likes of chemical fertiliser. This will have a positive impact for farmers from a cost perspective as well. It might also assist in the case of a neighbouring tillage farm that might need additional nutrient spreading at a particular time. It is about the efficient management of slurry storage on farms and I believe that it will have a positive impact on water quality.

What was the Senator's second question?

PJ Murphy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will farmers be required to have this additional slurry storage under the new nitrates rules?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Teagasc has conducted research on this and it is expected that additional capacity will be required per animal on farm. This is being worked through at the moment as to what exactly it will be. Given that and the fact that we want to try to ensure efficient management, having additional slurry storage capacity on farm is obviously a really positive thing we are trying to implement. What was the Senator's third question?

PJ Murphy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My third question was on standards and their enforcement. For something that is exempt like this, who is overseeing that the construction is carried out to the necessary standard?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Department of agriculture has very clear standards for slurry storage that have to be adhered to. As the Senator knows, anyone applying for a TAMS grant has to build the structure in accordance with the standards. Even if someone is not availing of a TAMS grant, there are regulations under the nitrates rules that they must comply with the set standards and specifications as laid down by the Department of agriculture. As part of some of the grants in place, farmers are required to get the exemption certificate in order to apply for their grant from TAMS. Everything has to be done in accordance with the regulations that are set down. Inspections are carried out by local authorities and the Department of agriculture on farm regarding a host of areas to do with the environment and ensuring everything is done appropriately on farm.

Thomas Gould (Cork North-Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Many of the questions I was going to ask have been asked. I want to go back to the point that was made by the previous speaker about water quality. I note that the Minister of State hopes that what we are doing here today and what he is looking to bring forward will mean a dramatic improvement in the quality of water. This issue of water quality is concerning more and more people.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We all want better water quality. Our agriculture sector is very important to the Irish economy, for jobs and exports, and we have to ensure water quality is improved. The EPA report published today contains some positives but it is not where we want it to be. As I said, there are improvements in the nitrates piece and phosphorous within that, which need to be built upon. The number of actions that have been carried out by farmers and the huge investment that has been put in by farmers around the country will show in the next report when it is completed by the EPA. Part of that is ensuring that we have adequate and sufficient slurry storage on farm. I am trying to remove red tape and things across all exempted development to try to simplify the planning process by removing things that do not require to be in there. There are protections for exempted development. For example, if it requires an EIA or an AA or is in a Natura 2000 site, the exemptions do not apply and planning has to be applied for in the normal way. These are the safeguards in place that I believe are sufficient and proportionate and will ensure that we get the balance right here, because that is what is most important.

Thomas Gould (Cork North-Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regarding the EPA report, is there a figure or a target for improvement with the work that the Minister of State is bringing forward? We are certainly not where we want to be with water quality. I appreciate the work the Minister of State is trying to do to help improve the situation. Has he set goals or targets as to how beneficial this legislation will be?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is very hard to quantify. We know that 52% are in compliance and everything is good, and significant work needs to be carried out to improve this percentage. It is very hard to put an exact number on what impact this particular measure will have. As the Deputy knows, water quality is not just one single item. It is a series of items, organisations, and individuals that have an impact on water quality, be that positive or negative. What I am trying to do is something that is in my control and that is in relation to the exempted development regulations. I want to remove something from the planning process in order to be able to streamline processes to ensure that farmers are able to invest in slurry storage capacity, which will have a positive impact on water quality. That is part of what I am trying to do as Minister of State, with the support of the committee.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister of State help me to visualise 1,000 cu. m? He could perhaps do it in terms of the measurement of the floor space just so I can get a sense of the size, first of all. Would it be 100 sq. m of floor space?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be 18 m by 18 m by 3 m deep. It would probably be a similar size to this committee room.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Okay. I do not know how it works in the Department of agriculture, but typically with exempted developments, there would not be a local authority building control inspection, for example. There would not be a check-up to see if the building was built in accordance with building control. The responsibility for that rests with the person who constructs the building. This is not meant as an objection; I just want to tease it out. Given the size of the structure and the volume of slurry, will there be any specific checks at the start of the roll-out of this new exempted development category to ensure that a random selection of them are built in accordance with the regulations? I fully accept that the legal responsibility to comply with the Department of agriculture rules rests with the person who is building the structure but that is a lot of slurry in one place if it is the size of this committee room. What we do not want is any portion of those structures to not be built in accordance with the Department of agriculture rules and then to have any unwanted spill-off that could have public health implications or environmental implications, including for the farmers or the rural communities in the area. How do we make sure at the early stages that there are not building control issues or non-compliance issues?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Significant grant support is available from the Department of agriculture in this space, There is 60% grant aid for slurry storage. As part of this, farmers have to ensure they have a certificate of exemption from the local authority to say that applies.

That, I argue, will cater for the vast majority.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a paper certificate. Is there anybody on site checking that where there is exempted development and 60% finance, the structure is being built properly? I would have thought this is a building control issue. Is it a building control issue for the building control unit in the Department or does the Department of agriculture get involved? I suspect most of our building control unit officials do not have the same expertise on storage standards.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The granting of aid requires a check by the Department. It has to be done-----

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An inspection of the facility?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----but building control is a matter for local authorities, as the Deputy rightly pointed out.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am asking only so I will be clear. Does the Department of agriculture check involve a physical inspection of the structure, as it is being constructed, by somebody who would know whether it was compliant?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It does. It is required that the construction has been deemed exempt. It does not require an EIA and it will not be on a Natura site. It will be set back a sufficient distance from watercourses and neighbouring locations.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One of the issues concerns the size of the structure. Non-compliance with building controls is what could lead to the potential for unwanted leakage. We spent some hours here earlier talking about building defects, which, as the Minister of State knows from having been a member of the committee previously, was a big issue. How do we ensure that there are no building defects and that the facility will do exactly what the Minister of State is talking about, from both environmental and public health points of view?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Could the Deputy elaborate on the last question?

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How do we make sure the structures are built in accordance with the building control regulations? I assume there are very specific building control regulations to ensure the safety of the storage so there will not be unnecessary spillage that could have environmental and public health complications.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are legal requirements under nitrates law to ensure something is built in a compliant way. There are, obviously, checks by the Department of agriculture in relation to-----

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are not building control checks.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No. Then there are local authority building control checks in the same way that there would be such checks for any structure built. We were speaking earlier about the exemptions pertaining to the commercial-to-residential aspect. It is a matter for the local authority to ensure the conversions are made compliantly.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Could I make a final suggestion?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sure.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Minister of State knows, building control compliance is an obsession of mine. Given the size and scale of the facilities, and that the primary objective is to ensure greater compliance with environmental and public health requirements, would it not make sense, particularly in the early stages of rolling out the new exempted development category, for local authorities in areas where such facilities are more likely to be built to be required to implement a minimum expectation level or spot-inspection rate of, say, 10% or 15%? Currently with building control, there is a protocol established between the Department and the local authorities such that local authorities are meant to inspect up to 15% of new building projects. Dublin City Council, for example, has a very good regime. It inspects 100% of multi-unit developments. Is there an argument that the Department of Housing, in its building control function, should require the early stages of the roll-out to include a specific focus on ensuring things are done right? What the Minister of State does not want is for something to go wrong only for me to come back to him at a committee meeting asking why we did not check earlier. If we just leave it to the building control sections, it could become an issue. As the Minister of State knows from the situation in Waterford, and as I know from Dublin, these sections are chronically understaffed and already very stretched. If there is to be a new area of building control activity, the likelihood of them being able to inspect of their own volition is limited, unless we ask them to do it. I am not asking the Minister of State to commit to anything here, but there is a conversation to be had.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I hear what the Deputy is saying and understand why he is saying it. His concern relates to pollution and run-off. When the Department of agriculture carries out inspections on farms, it assesses for pollution. Where something is not operating as it should, it will be very evident from an inspection. I accept the Deputy's point on taking action before a facility is built rather than afterwards, when something can become a problem. I can think about that. Perhaps it is something that can be dealt with in the detailed circular I issue to local authorities. However, I take what the Deputy is saying on board.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let me make a final point. What we know from our experience of building defects in other categories is that the negative impact of defects is not necessarily visually evident at the point when the facility starts to operate. For example, water ingress could be relevant in the context of a facility that has a lot of semiliquid slurry. These things sometimes transpire only at a later stage if the building control element is correct. I would fully support the Minister if he at least discussed this with his officials and examined some kind of guidance by way of a circular, maybe with inspections at some level, purely from a building control point of view, early on. That would make it better for everybody.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank everyone for being here. I apologise for missing a share of the meeting. I was speaking on the Housing Finance Agency (Amendment) Bill.

On the slurry exemption, could the Minister speak about separation distances from the likes of water supply and watercourses? The separation distance from a public road is 10 m, and I believe it is 100 m from a nearby residential property, other than where that property is the residential property of the farmer. To be perfectly blunt, if I thought a slurry storage tank was going up within 100 m of my house, I would be a little concerned. How did the Department settle on the 100 m distance for a private residential property?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I understand it, the 100 m is the setback distance as part of the animal housing element that has existed for the last 24 years. While the slurry storage facility can be stand-alone, slurry can also be stored under animal warehousing.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In a slatted unit.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Exactly. The setback distance has been in place. The capacity of 1,000 cu. m corresponds to the 300 sq. m of animal housing we are providing for now.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the position with regard to the animal housing. This is about a stand-alone facility.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It corresponds to the 300 sq. m.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To the 300 sq. m.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It corresponds to the 300 sq. m for animal housing. The 1,000 cu. m is what can be stored under a facility of that size.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is considered to be an adequate separation distance. Was an issue ever raised in terms of exempted development regulations that apply to animal housing?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has not come up. As the Deputy knows, we had public consultation as part of the wider exempted development discussion. There were over 920 submissions. I am not aware that what the Deputy is referring to was one of the points raised in the public consultation. A very significant number did respond in the public consultation, so if the matter has been a concern, I would expect it to have been raised. The existing animal warehousing guideline has been operating for the past 24 years.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At first sight, the distance would not appear to be huge, but I take the point the Minister of State is making.

I missed the part on commercial-to-residential conversions. Am I allowed to raise it now?

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sure.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I note from the briefing document that just over 1,400 applications were made in the six-year period from 2018 to 2024. What is the Minister of State’s assessment of that? It would strike me as a relatively low level of activity.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has been a slow burner since its introduction. I would have to do the calculations but I would argue that numbers of applicants in 2024 and 2023 probably correspond to the numbers in the four or five preceding years. It has ramped up and the number of units provided as a result of the notifications has increased.

Since 2022, former pubs have been included. I have that figure. In 2024, there were 62 notifications about former pubs, which delivered 160 houses. That was only added in 2022 and the ramp-up of change of use from commercial to residential has increased year on year.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate that. Do we know whether the figure provided for the pubs translated into actual activity? Were there applications from people who sought the exemption but did not follow through and carry out the work?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The notification is given at the outset before commencement of works. We do not have a completion figure. However, in my experience of dealing with small builders on the ground who have availed of the commercial to residential exemption, combined with such schemes as the repair and leasing scheme, which has been hugely successful in my county, Waterford, when a property is given a notification, it is pretty much ready to go and for builders to get on site. While a development might not have been delivered within the calendar year the notification was given, there would be an expectation that it will be delivered, although it might fall into the first or second quarter of the following year.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is any publicity planned on trying to increase the overall level of activity on foot of these exempted developments progressing and so on to try to get the message out that these exemptions exist so that we can do more in converting old former commercial properties into residential units? Is that something we could consider doing?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will take that back and discuss it with the Minister, Deputy Browne. The Deputy makes a fair point. While there is increased awareness of these exemptions and such, it is probably not widespread. Where schemes are in place and used well, they are having a positive impact on reducing vacancy and dereliction. That is what we want to see. In the context of the budget announcement last week on derelict property tax and the new housing plan, I will take back the Deputy's suggestion.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is one thing for the Department to do something, but it is important to include the local authorities in this because they have their own communication systems in place and we should try to utilise those to get the message out.

I may have missed this. I am sure other members asked about further exempted development and the timeline for garden structures. Do we have an indication on that? Perhaps it was given earlier.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Exempted development regulations are currently in place under the 2000 Act. As we transfer to the 2024 Act, those regulations need to be updated and brought forward. We had a public consultation on potential new exemptions and it is intended they will be brought forward using a thematic approach. The first of those will be on the domestic side. Attention has been on the modular buildings at the rear of properties, but there are other elements of the domestic regulations, for example, subdivision of a property or extensions to the rear, that need to be done at the same time as the modular buildings at the rear of properties because they could have an impact when combined with one another. It therefore makes sense to bring them forward as a package and the others will follow. It is intended to bring those forward before Christmas or the end of the year.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When the Minister of State says they will be brought forward, does he mean they will be in place before the end of the year? Will it be possible to use them before the end of the year?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not want to pre-empt it because there a number of moving parts associated with it. In the same way as we are carrying out the environmental consideration for the regulations before us, it will also have to be done as part of the domestic elements so I would be slow to say that. However, I am clearly saying that we will bring the thematic area of domestic regulations before the committee before the end of the year. I want to see them implemented as early as possible. I have been clear about the modular buildings to the rear of properties. There are differing opinions. We are working through all the submissions from the various bodies, individuals and organisations at the moment and we will bring the regulations forward to the committee in due course.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State. I welcome the extension to the end of 2028 and agree with Deputy McGrath that we could do with publicity about that. In my small rural village in north Longford, a public house that I frequented for many years and that closed during the Covid-19 pandemic is now nine one-bedroom apartments. The bar is now a one-bedroom apartment and there is no problem getting it filled. There is a massive need for small one-bedroom housing in our community in Longford, so I fully welcome the development.

I come from a rural area and have met all the farming organisations, including the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, ICSA, the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, and the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, ICMSA. The derogation is key to the future of agriculture and I am in favour of anything that helps with fighting the case to safeguard it because the alternative - losing the derogation or it being reduced - would be significant for rural agricultural communities. We have to fight hard to make sure we keep it. Therefore, this is welcomed by the farming and agricultural communities. The quicker these regulations are in place, the better. Those communities are waiting to be able to extend their storage capacity. At certain times of year, we see people having to go out on land when it was not proper and they are destroying good land for grazing.

On the regulations, I note that when it comes to the grants for agriculture, if a tank is one foot bigger than it is meant to be, the departmental inspection for the grant will not proceed until other documentation is completed or even planning permission obtained. I know that from my experience with a lot of people in the area. For various reasons, the tank did not go exactly where it was meant to so they ran into trouble. It is being monitored on the ground. I am not throwing in a curve ball, but we have a particular issue where it went astray. On the shores of Lough Ree - some of the officials may be aware of it - it was not monitored or checked. Massive storage tanks were built on the shores of Lough Ree unbeknown to the local authority and it is now costing Longford County Council north of €2 million to draw away from it and completely remediate the site to avoid a potential disaster for Lough Ree. I am just putting that on the record as it is hanging over our local authority and other potential services in the county because it is a bill we will face. Can that be looked at? I am asking for support for Longford County Council to be able to remediate that so we do not have a massive issue with pollution on Lough Ree. I apologise for throwing that at the Minister of State.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The only thing I would say on that is that the regulations before us are not retrospective. You cannot make something compliant by virtue of an exemption that may be coming into force. It is forward-looking from here. I am not familiar with that particular case.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, I just wanted to put it on the record while we were on the subject.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To be clear then, nobody who has gone and built a slurry storage tank, for example, will be able to avail of the exemption retrospectively. It is only for brand new facilities.

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is correct, and we have been crystal clear on that from the outset.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes. It is just good to get that on record.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I totally understand that but the potential of that arising was an issue that was brought to my attention in the last couple of weeks, so I wanted to put it on record.

Séamus McGrath (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sorry for putting this on the Minister of State, but is the change for exempted developments in gardens and so on also unlikely to be retrospective or is it still being worked through?

John Cummins (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot say on the domestic piece. We are still working through that. To be clear about what is before us today, this is not retrospective.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That concludes our consideration of this matter. I propose that the committee request the clerk to the committee to inform the Dáil and Seanad accordingly. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, and his officials for assisting the committee in its consideration of this matter. It is the first time he is has brought legislation to this committee. I served with him for five years in Seanad Éireann and he has been an excellent representative in the area of housing. I wish him well in his role as Minister of State in the Department of housing.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

You are making the Minister of State blush, a Chathaoirligh.

Micheál Carrigy (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is doing a very good job.