Joe O'Reilly (Fine Gael)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

"notes the promised introduction of an insulation scheme; regrets the delay in opening applications for this insulation scheme; and condemns the Government for not providing adequate resources for long established schemes such as housing aid for the elderly and housing adaptation grants for the disabled."

This amendment identifies the central weaknesses of the proposition before the House and condemns the nature of the organisation of this scheme, the lack of funding and the lack of coherence in terms of existing schemes.

This scheme has been badly organised. This Government appears to have lost its touch because while the scheme is good in principle, and nobody objects to the principle because we have all called for it, including some of my colleagues, it has been presented and organised very badly. It was a major mistake to leave a time gap between the announcement of the scheme and the beginning of applications at the end of March because people are putting insulation work on hold. A Member of the Dáil told me yesterday that in one area in County Waterford, and my colleague Senator Coffey would be familiar with this, ten jobs have been lost because there is no activity in the supply of insulation materials. That is a serious development.

In the county that my good friend, Senator Brady, and myself hail from, County Cavan, Kingspan is one of the best employers in the area. It is a well organised company which is run by the Murtagh family. That firm is now experiencing a stand still in activity in the insulation area. That was a major error on the part of the Government. It is a disgrace and is something that should not have happened. To be fair, it is not Senator Butler's fault but it is a systems failure in that there should not be a time gap between the announcement and the implementation of the scheme. Strategies should have been put in place to prevent that. This time gap is causing unemployment at a time when construction is in a terrible state — it is at a standstill. It is a very serious matter.

The Minister must try to do something to shorten the period to the very minimum. I acknowledge that Senator Butler's point made earlier was that we must shorten that gap because it is wrong. The Minister should do two things. He should first accept that a blunder has been made and that it is a systems failure and, second, apologise Obama style. Having apologised, he should then affirm to us that he will go back to his Department and at dawn tomorrow he will begin a process of implementing the scheme as a priority within a few days. It is a disgrace that this has happened and a shocking indictment of Government. It is up to the Minister to apologise and set a process of correction in place.

This scheme is very important for the construction industry because up to 37,000 jobs were lost in January and there are 326,000 people unemployed throughout the country; we have some projections also in that regard. The construction industry needs a boost. Not only do we need to insulate houses but we must insulate schools, to which reference is made, and initiate a full programme of school refurbishment and building.

When we consider the cost of jobseeker's allowance, the amount of money that goes back into the economy in terms of VAT receipts and taxation, the cost of prefabricated buildings for schools and the reduced cost of contract work, it would be almost cost neutral to have an insulation scheme for schools. In that sense this programme it is to be welcomed as a boost for the construction industry.

I want to raise an issue which the Minister of State might respond to when replying. It is shocking that we are not honouring the housing aid for the elderly scheme and the disabled persons' grants. Those schemes have been stopped in my county and in a number of other counties owing to a lack of funding. A Minister — I am not sure whether it was the Minister of State — gave a disingenuous answer in the Dáil. He stated that it was up to the local authority to provide 20% of the funding and to determine the amount of money to be spent on housing aid for the elderly and for the disabled grant scheme. County Cavan, as elsewhere, has the funding locally and is prepared to dedicate local funding of 20% but it lacks the crucial 80%. That is why that leg is in our motion. It is very important we implement housing aid for the elderly and the essential repairs grant. Those two schemes are first cousins of an insulation scheme. The windows issue would be dealt with within the essential repairs grant and it is very important that this would happen.

I welcome the scheme in principle and the allocation made to it but I repeat that a mess has been made in its implementation. There is a problem at present with fuel poverty. The Economic and Social Research Institute determines that fuel poverty exists if a family spends more than 10% of its income on fuel. There are now 300,000 people experiencing fuel poverty. An insulation scheme and a back-up programme are obviously important. For this reason, housing aid for the elderly and the essential repairs grants are vital. We must have a response to these points.

I would like to be able to go back to the members of Cavan County Council tomorrow and tell them I was told in the Seanad today that there will be a proper response and that the essential repairs grant and housing aid for the elderly will be implemented as a matter of urgency. I would like to say the same to colleagues in other county councils. Senator McFadden spoke about County Westmeath in similar terms recently. Such a response would take care of the windows issue.

I am in favour of the building energy rating and I welcome the grant for it. This is very important in the context of Kyoto fines. It is very important we do not waste money unnecessarily, either buying carbon credits or paying Kyoto fines. That is money going out of the country. It is not productive expenditure and we should not be paying it.

I accept the points that were made very well and very articulately by Senator Brady concerning alternative and green energy. Those initiatives are, of course, parallel with this one. This scheme is good in principle but we need to add a number of points. It must be initiated immediately and the banks must come on side to lend to people. I ask the Minister of State to what degree he is in proper and firm negotiations with the banks so that there may be a positive response to householders who will try to use the scheme. I hope there will be quality control on the scheme. I ask the Minister of State to respond to this point too. We must monitor how attractive the scheme is and change or tweak it as necessary. I believe there will be a high uptake but am a little concerned that the grant aid may be on the low side. A little more might be needed to kick-start it. One hopes it will work because it is vital it does. I look forward to the Minister of State's apology and to his assurances that he will get the scheme going within 48 hours——