I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House. This is an important issue. This morning, I stood in the rain outside the Criminal Courts of Justice with my colleagues at the criminal Bar to demonstrate the importance of this issue. The reality is that cuts were made to the criminal legal aid scheme in the aftermath of the financial emergency in this country.

Nobody had a difficulty with those cuts. They were taken in greater measure than many sectors, but barristers and solicitors who work under the criminal legal aid scheme accepted that they were necessary. They have not been restored. We have raised this issue for many long years now. This year there was a 10% restoration, which has left barristers being paid rates that are 20 years old.

This is an important issue. It is singularly unfair that criminal practitioners are the last to have their fees restored. There is a real danger that this will affect the administration of justice. I speak to colleagues all the time at the Bar, particularly junior colleagues, who are choosing not to practise criminal law because they cannot make a living at it. It is unsustainable to expect them to work in the District Court for €27, which may be the only fee they receive in a whole day. They might have to drive some distance to earn that fee and may spend more money on petrol or diesel doing so. This is not sustainable, and it will have a knock-on impact on the entirety of our criminal justice system. This will be seen in a decade from now when nobody is practising criminal law and we do not achieve the standards of representation we expect from the sector. That will result in delays for victims, miscarriages of justice and all kinds of other knock-on problems. The Bar of Ireland and other criminal practitioners have made a reasonable request, not for the State to give them extra money but put that money back to where it was.

The criminal legal Bar has a greater proportion of women working in it than any other area of law. It is the most poorly paid of the legal sectors. There is a fundamental injustice in that and that women are left to the side to tolerate and take on whatever is going. The criminal Bar is fundamental to our Constitution. It is the place where heinous crimes and the standards of society and what is acceptable and unacceptable are tried. It is the place where people who may be accused in the wrong need good legal representation to ensure the State is not guilty of miscarriages of justice. We had a funeral last weekend of the last man hanged in the State, and it was a miscarriage of justice in that instance.

We need constant representation because the criminal courts are where a disproportionately high number of people from socially deprived areas are represented. The least we might do is to ensure that none of them are accused in the wrong. Just because they are from impoverished communities does not mean that they should fall prey to this. That is not being a do-gooder but abiding by the Constitution of our Republic and ensuring that no citizen is at risk of being accused in the wrong. It is ensuring that all citizens are protected under the criminal justice laws of our society and State. We need to ensure that crimes are prosecuted properly and with the full rigour of the law. It is also important that any of us who could be accused in the wrong in the morning has good legal representation.

I was called to the Bar in 2012. Of the 120 people who were called to the Bar that July, only two still practise criminal law. They are a man and a woman, so we at least have one of each. There is, however, an appalling injustice being done to the criminal Bar as a result of the failure to restore barristers' payments.

I thank the Senators for raising this important matter and I acknowledge their passion for and work on this issue. I will first reiterate my and Minster for Justice, Deputy McEntee's, appreciation of the important role played by barristers and solicitors in the administration of criminal justice. I also acknowledge the important role that women play in this sector, as Senator Seery Kearney pointed out. I am aware of today's withdrawal of services and further proposed withdrawals of services on 15 and 24 July. I hope these further withdrawals can be avoided.

Having undertaken to make progress in criminal legal aid in budget 2024, the Minister did just that. As acknowledged by Senator Ward, the Minister secured €9 million to provide a 10% increase in criminal legal aid fees, with effect from 1 January 2024. The Minister has been equally clear regarding her intentions this year, advising the Dáil last week that this crisis-era reduction should be restored.

The Minister will once again seek to make progress in this year’s budget with the restoration of criminal legal aid fees and is working to secure the remainder of the restoration to the fees, namely, the two 8% cuts within the context of the budget.

As Senators will be aware, we cannot make budget announcements months ahead of budget day and there is a budgetary process that must be followed. As part of this work, the Department of Justice has commenced a review of criminal legal aid as linked to last year's 10% increase, and as part of improving the overall system, which includes fees.

A dedicated team of officials are currently working on the review. They are laying the foundations for an improved and more efficient system of administering criminal legal aid and intend to work collaboratively with all stakeholders. Indeed, the review and the modernisation of the criminal legal aid scheme was discussed with the Bar Council and the Law Society when the officials met with them recently. Their input is an important part of the process. The Department will continue to engage with all relevant stakeholders, including the legal professions on the modernisation and the funding of the legal aid system.

To further modernise the criminal legal aid system, the general scheme of the criminal justice (legal aid) Bill was published in July last year. The key purpose of the Bill is to transfer the administration of the criminal legal aid scheme to the Legal Aid Board and otherwise update the administration of criminal legal aid. The Bill will modernise the operation of the criminal legal aid scheme, introducing strengthened oversight and governance structures. It is the intention of the Minister for Justice that significant progress will be made on this matter as Department officials continue to engage with the legal profession.

The barristers and solicitors ensuring the fair and effective administration of criminal justice play a crucial part in the justice system. As I have mentioned, the Minister said last summer that she wanted to make progress on criminal legal aid in last year's budget and she did that. She has been clear about her intentions to do that again this year. However, as I am sure Senators can appreciate, nobody can make budget announcements months ahead of budget day. The Minister, and her Department, are committed to continuing to engage with and work with the legal professions and all relevant stakeholders to reach a resolution on this matter.

While I hope further withdrawals of services can be avoided, I understand from the Courts Service that in the absence of legal representatives for any reason it is open to each court and judge to adjourn the matter to another date. The Department of Justice has been and will continue to engage with everybody, including the legal professions, on the modernisation and funding of the legal aid system. That really is the key message from the Minister today.

I appreciate the Minister of State’s sincerity in this regard, and what she said about recognising the importance of legal representatives and the role played by solicitors and barristers. I confess, having spoken to them outside the courts this morning, that they do not feel that importance is recognised and if a further withdrawal of services is to be avoided, there is a very simple way to do so. I recognise what the Minister of State said about not making budget announcements but the time is now to make that change.

In reference to the legal aid Bill, the review of criminal legal aid is fine. The report by the Joint Committee on Justice on the pre-legislative scrutiny was very clear that there is no basis for moving it out of the Department of Justice and into the criminal legal aid board. That is something I hope will be taken into account in respect of the Bill.

The fact needs to be emphasised that there is a public perception that barristers are extremely well paid. A very small minority are extremely well paid; the vast majority are not. They struggle in the same way and, in fact, are in a life, no more than ourselves in politics but even to a greater extent, of precariousness. Barristers can work extremely hard unpaid hours on a case but by the time that case gets into court there are other things going on and they have to hand it over to someone else to collect fees. All of that needs to be considered here and respect given to the fact that they are the bulwark of the Constitution.

I hear what the Senators are saying and I will convey their feedback to the Minister. The main message is that, from a budgetary perspective, it is very difficult to make budgetary announcements ahead of budget day and I know that the Senators appreciate that. I understand their sincerity and passion about this matter. I also understand that they want to see a resolution and that is something the Minister also wants.

The Minister of State is very welcome. The National Advocacy Service provides a free and independent representative advocacy service to adults with disabilities across Ireland. The service has a particular remit to work with people with disabilities who are in vulnerable situations such as people who are isolated from their community of choice or mainstream society or who may communicate differently and who have limited formal or natural supports.

We are talking about some of the most vulnerable people in our society and a service that is absolutely crucial to those people. These advocates stand up for people who in many cases have nobody else to stand up for them. The National Advocacy Service provides assistance to more than 1500 disabled people each year, with in-person advocacy interventions in areas including housing, access to justice, healthcare, safeguarding and supporting in decision-making. The service is currently in crisis and the workers are now on strike for the second time. The reason they are on strike is that their employer, the Citizens Information Board, along with the Department of Social Protection, is refusing to implement a Labour Court recommendation to make modest improvements to their pay scales. The existing scale has just four points and the recommendation from the Labour Court is to bring it in line with other similar organisations, by expanding it to a ten-point scale with additional long-service increments. The top salary is just €46,000, which, for the challenging and highly complex roles involved, is frankly an insult to the workers concerned.

Here we have a fully funded public body under the remit of the Department of Social Protection refusing to implement a Labour Court recommendation to bring a small element of pay decency to these crucial roles. There really is no hiding place for the Government. The Department of Social Protection, which has attended talks at the Workplace Relations Commission with former Labour Court chairperson Kevin Duffy, has point blank refused to date to implement this recommendation. This is not just a slap in the face for these vital workers but a slap in the face for the industrial relations machinery of the State and the Labour Court.

The Department of Social Protection ultimately funds the National Advocacy Service and many other community organisations. Its refusal to fund the implementation of the Labour Court recommendation undermines all workers rights to a fair implementation of the independent decisions of the Labour Court. The approach of the Government towards these community workers, in refusing to assist with the implementation of a Labour Court recommendations, is in stark to the Minister’s calls for the Labour Court to be respected in the Aer Lingus pilots' dispute. It is time this Government stood up for the community sector and gave these workers the respect they deserve. The position adopted by the Government and Department, in refusing to adequately fund community organisations, indicates contempt for all community workers in funded organisations. It is time to respect the community sector, its workers and service users and the families who rely on these vital services.

These workers are on strike. Some are outside the gates of Leinster House as we speak. I was standing with them before I came in here. For every day that they are on strike, the most vulnerable people in the State have nobody to advocate for them. The reason they have gone on strike is that the Government has failed to fund the service properly and, worse still, has refused to implement a Labour Court recommendation. The cost of implementing it is absolutely minuscule. I cannot begin to express the anger that those workers feel. They have been represented brilliantly by their union SIPTU, but they have been let down by the Government and, in particular, the Department of Social Protection. I am hoping the Minister of State will give me a positive response. I urge her, after this discussion, to go and meet the workers, who will be outside until 2 p.m., and listen first-hand to just how hard their lives are, how hard the struggle they have to endure is and the failure of the Government to address this issue.

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. I commend him on the passion he has shown for the provision of advocacy services. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Humphreys, acknowledges the value of the important services the National Advocacy Service, NAS, provides to adults with disabilities throughout the country, as the Senator articulated so well. I, too, value them.

The Senator may be aware that the National Advocacy Service was established in 2010, originally as part of the Citizens Information Service. NAS was then established as a service delivery company of the Citizens Information Board and as an independent company, limited by guarantee, and a registered charity in 2014. It is one of the Citizens Information Board’s 22 service delivery companies, with services delivered under a service-level agreement with the Citizens Information Board.

In 2023, just last year, NAS attended a WRC conciliation conference with SIPTU over a dispute concerning pay, as the Senator has said. Following this, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in October and the case was heard in January this year. Neither the Citizens Information Board nor the Department of Social Protection was party to the WRC process and that is because NAS staff members are not employees of the Citizens Information Board or of the Department. They are employees of an independent company that provides important services on behalf of the Citizens Information Board.

SIPTU, on behalf of NAS staff, submitted to the Labour Court that in the period since the establishment of NAS in 2010, there has been a significant divergence between the pay and the other terms and conditions of workers versus those applicable to comparable grades employed in the citizens information services, which are also funded by CIB. The Labour Court felt the claim was well founded and requested that NAS submit a business case to the Citizens Information Board seeking to address divergences in pay with comparable workers in companies under the CIB umbrella. The business case was submitted to the CIB on 10 May 2024 and while the CIB agrees with the Labour Court recommendation regarding addressing divergences that have developed in NAS since 2010, the CIB's review of the business case has identified difficulties with the comparator grades used in the submission. I understand the board of NAS, CIB and the Department of Social Protection have agreed to implement the Labour Court recommendation in order to address pay divergences and to ensure the staff in NAS are paid the same as comparable grades in the citizens information services. However, the Labour Court recommendation did not specify which grades within the Citizens Information Services should be used as benchmark for this purpose. On 24 June, talks led by former Labour Court chair, Kevin Duffy, commenced. The purposes of the talks were to discuss how to implement the Labour Court recommendation in these circumstances and to ensure any pay agreement using Exchequer funds is based on the principle that employees who undertake demonstrable comparable work receive comparable pay.

I know the Minister of State is just here reading a script and while I have some sympathies for her in that respect, that is an absolutely appalling answer and anyone reading it will see that. The Labour Court recommendation needs to be implemented. Regarding the level of excuses here and being unclear what comparable grades there are, I can tell the Minister of State that whatever comparable grade was suggested by the union, the employer and the Department of Social Protection rejected it. It is completely disingenuous to somehow say there are still some things to be worked out here. There are not. What we need to do is implement a recommendation and get these workers back to work so that they can provide the incredibly valuable services to the most vulnerable people in the State. It is not happening because of the resistance of the Government and the Department of Social Protection. Honestly, I appeal to the Minister of State after this to come out to meet the workers outside the gates of Leinster House. They should not have to spend one more day on strike. The reason they are on strike is because of the Government's refusal to implement a Labour Court recommendation, even as it calls on the Aer Lingus pilots to respect the Labour Court recommendation they have been given. The hypocrisy here is horrendous. I am not accusing the Minister of State but I am accusing the Minister for Social Protection of a gross failure to respect these workers and actually ensure they get the pay and conditions they deserve.

As the Senator will be aware, talks which were led by Kevin Duffy broke down on Friday without agreement and strike action has now recommenced. That is the reason for that. It is deeply unfortunate and will undoubtedly impact people with disabilities. We do not want that to happen and we do not want that to continue. I understand a number of offers were made over the course of the four-day talks-----

They were worthless offers.

-----but that all were rejected.

Worthless.

Let the Minister of State continue.

Offers included measures to immediately address pay divergences with NAS, an immediate pay increase for all NAS employees, and an independent assessment to establish the grades within CIS to which the NAS staff would be benchmarked. Significantly, the immediate pay increase for staff went beyond the Labour Court's recommendations, which was limited, as the Senator has said earlier, to four grades of NAS. Offers were also made whereby relevant NAS employees in the four grades covered by the Labour Court recommendation would receive the majority of the increased pay they sought immediately, based on SIPTU's submission regarding which grades are comparable, with any balance to be paid once the independent assessment of grade comparability was completed. I understand SIPTU has rejected this and all other offers on the basis of balance of the increased pay being contingent on the outcome of an independent process. This is regrettable as it is important that any pay agreement using Exchequer funds is based on the principle that employees who undertake demonstrable comparable work receive comparable pay.

No industrial relations dispute is ever solved in isolation or without compromise on all sides. I strongly urge all parties to return to talks to reach agreement and reduce any unnecessary impacts on NAS's service users who, as the Senator has pointed out, are suffering as a result. The focus of all parties should be on the people using these critical services and working to minimise any impact on them by reaching an agreement. CIB and the Department of Social Protection remain available to assist in reaching an agreement to this dispute should SIPTU wish to re-engage in talks.

The civic engagement team of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth held a meeting regarding the Thornton Hall site on 29 May as the Government had proposed its use as a refugee and asylum seeker accommodation centre. The national lead on civic engagement, Eibhlin Byrne, briefed me along with other Members of the Oireachtas from the north Dublin and east Meath region at this meeting in May. At the time of our meeting, the Garda was completely unaware of the proposed repurposing of Thornton Hall. We were given assurances that this disastrous plan would be operating by the end of June. It is now July and as we prepare to break for the summer recess, there is no clear plan in sight as to what will happen next. Thornton Hall has been designated as a site for a prison. Turning Thornton Hall into a tent city is a poorly planned emergency response to failed migration policy.

In March, a press release stated that the Government agreed a new comprehensive accommodation strategy for international protection, IP, applicants. The press release outlines that the Government's plan will see a move away from full reliance on private providers and towards a core of State-owned accommodation. Is that a coded way of saying we are going to put people in tents until we can think of something better? It says clearly in this press release that the use of State land for prefabricated and modular units is a distinct part of the plan. Thornton Hall has clearly been considered for modular or tented accommodation for months now. The public is still none the wiser.

Ms Byrne also added that approximately six sites across Ireland were also being considered for similar tent city arrangements. These proposals are horrific and inhumane. It is outrageous that our Government is behaving in a secretive manner with respect to its national plans. The Thornton Hall tent site is a terrible idea. If it is designed to be a blueprint for a national solution to a migrant crisis, it is an abysmal failure. Many people have raised very pertinent and valid concerns about water. In a recent interview with Gript media, Councillor Gillian Toole added that a strategic housing development was refused there due to the lack of water infrastructure. Thornton Hall is also on a flight path. There are serious concerns regarding sound pollution for any form of human habitation there.

We have heard time and again from the Government about international obligations and how communities have demonstrated great solidarity and welcome for those who come here seeking refuge. That is a very narrow view of the story in Ireland today. Towns have been destroyed. Hotels in small towns in Ireland are akin to town halls and so much more beyond that. This Government has no regard for the people of Ireland. It serves international pressures and forces instead of the electorate. I call on the Government, after the disastrous vote for the EU migration pact, to finally listen to the people of this country. The Irish people want sensible, reasonable border control. They want concrete plans and a functional visa programme, and sensible humanitarian policies. We are almost certainly heading to a general election in the autumn. I urge candidates to talk less about international obligations and more about national obligations.

Ireland and many other European countries are experiencing a significant increase in people seeking international protection. The arrival numbers remain significantly elevated. In the first 26 weeks of this year, more than 10,000 people have arrived in Ireland seeking accommodation from the State, averaging 386 people per week. This is more than five times the average from 2017 to 2019. The highest weekly applications so far this year has been 610 applicants.

The Government is making every effort to accommodate people seeking international protection against a backdrop of unprecedented demand. However, the situation remains challenging, and the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth cannot provide accommodation to all applicants.

More than 2,300 single men are awaiting an offer of IPAS accommodation. Against this backdrop, the Government is considering all offers of accommodation in line with the comprehensive accommodation strategy approved by it on 27 March this year, to which the Senator referred. This revised strategy followed a review of the implementation approach for the White Paper due to the exponential growth in applications for international protection, with more than 30,000 new arrivals since January 2022, whereas the White Paper was originally based on 3,500 new arrivals each year. The review included inputs from the White Paper programme board and the external advisory group.

The Government-approved comprehensive accommodation strategy seeks to address the current accommodation shortfall while reforming the system over the longer term to ensure the State will always be able to meet its international commitments. The reforms will see a move away from full reliance on private providers, as the Senator acknowledged, and towards a core of State-owned accommodation, thereby delivering 14,000 State-owned beds by 2028, which is quadruple the previous commitment under the White Paper. This will be supplemented, as required, by high-standard commercial providers. Accommodation in the new strategy is being delivered through the following multistrand approach: the utilisation of State land for prefabricated and modular units; the conversion of commercial buildings; the targeted purchase of medium and larger turnkey properties; the design and build of new reception and integration centres; and the upgrading of IPAS centres.

As part of this planning, the Department is working with the Irish Prison Service on a handover regarding services at Thornton Hall. A review is currently ongoing regarding the current status of electricity, water and sewage capability at Thornton Hall. The Department is engaging with partners to complete relevant environmental assessments. The Department will work on several options, including short and long-term solutions to infrastructure challenges for accommodation for IP applicants at Thornton Hall. The immediate focus is on sourcing State-owned land where tented accommodation can be provided and vacant State-owned buildings. Additionally, an expression of interest process has been launched by the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth for the sourcing of suitable properties for acquisition or lease as international protection accommodation.

I am disappointed by the Minister of State's answer for two reasons. First, much of what she said has been lifted word for word from the March press release, which leads me to my second point, namely, she has completely ignored the specifics of my Commencement matter. I asked the Minister to give an update on the Thornton Hall site, which is being considered for use for refugee and asylum seeker accommodation, for details of the lease the Department holds, its duration and the overall size of the site being leased. I asked for three specific points to be clarified. I asked for details of the lease and I did not receive that from the Minister of State today. I asked for the lease duration and the overall size of the site being leased. I also asked this of Eibhlin Byrne, the national lead on civic engagement, and have received no response since.

Whoever advised the Minister of State on answering this Commencement matter should maybe have read my submission before answering. Is it now formal Government policy to ignore Members of these Houses on matters that are important to the public? I will leave it to the Minister of State to raise this with the Cabinet. It is not good enough. These are questions that the public want answered. There is one thing that I am sure the 56,000 people who are on the social housing list will not be very happy with. The Government is going to target and purchase medium and larger turnkey properties to deal with IPAS accommodation. The Irish people are not going to be happy with that.

I thank the Minister of State. We know she is busy and we appreciate her taking the time to come to the Seanad, as always.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan. The help-to-buy scheme, the first home scheme and the vacant property refurbishment grants have all been very successful in supporting young people to go out and purchase their first home.

These schemes have made a crucial difference to so many families since they were first introduced. The success of the vacant property grant is becoming clear every day of the week. There has been something like 8,500 applications for that grant thus far, whereby somebody on a vacant property can get a grant of up to €50,000 for refurbishment, or a grant of up to €70,000 for a derelict property. That has been hugely successful, not just from the point of view of young people being able to refurbish a property, but also to help our towns and cities deal with vacancy. Even in rural Ireland, it has been very welcome. I know in my own county of Monaghan, something like 170 have applied for this particular scheme and to a grant aid of approximately €6 million. The figures in Cavan are similar.

These schemes have been hugely beneficial and it is vitally important that everyone acknowledges that fact. However, as the Minister of State knows, time, money and crucially, inflation, do not stand still. There is now clearly a need for the Government to look again at these grants with a view to increasing the thresholds in order for more people to be able to avail of them, bearing the inflation in construction costs in recent years in mind. The help to buy scheme, which I mentioned earlier, came into effect in January 2017 and was designed to help first-time buyers acquire a deposit necessary to build or buy a new home. As I said, it has been hugely successful. In 2020, it was increased by the Minister, Deputy O'Brien to €30,000 for young people to help them make that first step. As I said, something like 48,000 have applied for that scheme. Every week, 500 people use the scheme to help them get their first home. Unfortunately, house prices continue to rise and the price for building and construction materials has gone up approximately 48% since 2019, which is something none of us could have ever foreseen when these schemes were first introduced.

According to industry experts, there is a real sign that the price of materials, crucial for the construction of properties, has no sign of abating. That, coupled with the increase in labour costs, means unfortunately that the value of these grants continues to be eroded. Regarding labour, I know the Government has introduced some very worthwhile schemes, including the apprenticeship and trainee schemes. Unfortunately, while they have been successful, it will take some time for them to eat in. The median price of a new home in rural Ireland at the moment is €400,000, whereas it is €500,000 in Dublin. Inflation in the cost of materials and labour continues to push up housing costs and, ultimately, prices. We all know the need for housing is great, but market demand is constrained by the ability to pay. Therefore, the level of supports for first-time buyers needs to be kept under current review, be it the first-time help to buy initiative or for renovation and refurbishment. In order to keep pace with the increase in costs of materials and labour, there is a need for these schemes to be constantly reviewed. I ask the Government to look at my request and I look forward to hearing the Minister of State's response to that.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir as an gceist seo a ardú. I thank the Senator for raising this question and for keeping it firmly on the agenda during his tenure in the Seanad. They are important schemes. The first home scheme, launched in July 2022, is a shared equity scheme, designed to help bridge the gap for eligible first-time buyers, other eligible home-buyers and self-builders between their deposit, mortgage, and the price of their new home, within established price ceilings. An overall investment of €480 million was committed to the scheme, with an equal contribution from the Department and the participating banks. In April, the first homes scheme published their quarter 1 2024 delivery figures. These show that over 4,000 approvals have been issued since the scheme launched, which is very impressive. The average price of a home bought was €379,469 with the average equity support provided being €66,642, equating to 18% of the price of the home. In June, the fourth scheduled six-monthly review of the price ceilings that apply to qualifying homes was undertaken with agreement to revise price ceilings in 14 local authority areas.

The 13 local authority areas at the lowest price ceiling increased their ceilings from €325,000 to €350,000, with the Limerick city and county ceiling increasing from €400,000 to €425,000. The revised price ceilings came into effect on 1 July this year.

The vacant property refurbishment grant was launched in July 2022 under the Croí Cónaithe towns fund to support the refurbishment of vacant and derelict properties and bring them back into use as homes. The grant initially provided up to €30,000 for the refurbishment of vacant properties, with up to a maximum of €50,000 for derelict properties. The maximum grant amounts payable were increased to €50,000 and €70,000, respectively, in May 2023 to take account of the increase in construction inflation to which the Senator referred. A review of the grant, which was committed to on its launch, including of grant levels, has been completed and is with the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, for consideration. Uptake of the grant has been positive, with more than 8,670 applications received, over 5,500 approved and almost 500 grants paid out as work is completed. In light of the success of the grant, the Government agreed to increase the target for homes to be delivered from 2,000 to 4,000 by 2025.

The help-to-buy scheme is a demand-led tax measure rather than voted expenditure. As such, it is a matter for the Minister for Finance.

Under the vacant property refurbishment grant, the national built heritage service in my Department has added a further provision of €5,000 for conservation advice to be given to the owners of eligible properties. As we can anticipate, these older buildings perform differently from modern buildings and restoring them can be complex. The conservation advice is very useful to the owners of such properties to point them in the right direction and take appropriate measures not to do any harm to a building. That can sometimes happen if the wrong interventions are made.

As the Senator said, all of these measures are feeding into the ambition the Government set out when it was formed. In line with our town centre first policy, they seek to unlock the potential of the amazing buildings in our towns, villages and cities. Bringing those properties back into use will bring vibrancy back to our town centres. As I outlined, the uptake of the schemes has been huge. The Government is keeping an open mind in this regard. The schemes are under constant review in the context of the changing landscape under which they operate.

I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. As he outlined, the schemes have been hugely successful. I compliment all the parties in government on bringing them forward. I thank the Minister of State for introducing the €5,000 grant for the conservation of farmhouses. It is very welcome. As he said, such restoration projects can be quite complex.

I am heartened that the Minister has undertaken a review of some of the schemes. I look forward to some news in that regard. The help-to-buy scheme comes under the auspices of the Minister for Finance. I have made contact with him about it. I am glad the Government is very much cognisant of the need to keep the schemes under constant review. I look forward to some positive developments in the not too distant future.

I thank the Senator for his positive comments. The schemes we are discussing have been transformative. The 4,000 approvals under the first home scheme and the upping of the targets for the vacant property refurbishment grant from 2,000 to 4,000 show the scale of demand for those schemes. We want to see our ambition realised. We have been losing the vernacular buildings dotted all over the country, which form part of the heritage of our towns and villages, at a rate of knots up to now. These grants mean families can see a channel of affordability in restoring such buildings. A constituent told me yesterday that having been unable to afford a farmhouse restoration project before a grant was available, the property is now restored.

We will continue to review the schemes. The Minister is committed to ensuring the ambition set out in Housing for All is met. Added to that, we want to see an architectural conservation officer in place in every local authority. The support and advice they can offer is really important. I thank the Senator for raising this Commencement matter. It is important that we continue to review and evaluate the success and efficacy of these schemes.

I thank the Minister of State for giving his time today. I thank Senator Gallagher for raising this very important Commencement matter.