I welcome the Minister of State to the House.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I ask him to picture, if he can, rats and mice in classrooms, water dripping down the windows, and young children sitting in their coats trying to stay warm in a 60-year-old building. This is not a scene from centuries ago. It is happening today in Marymount National School in Ballsgrove in Drogheda, a busy, thriving school doing its very best to serve a growing community, including more than its fair share of students with special educational needs.

The building dates back to 1969, and after more than half a century it is simply no longer fit for purpose. Staff and students contend daily with leaking roofs, persistent damp, poor insulation and even rodent infestations. Classrooms are cramped and overcrowded, with spaces constantly repurposed to cope with demand. Teachers are doing extraordinary work in conditions that no child or educator should have to endure.

Most distressing of all is the impact on children with special educational needs. The school has just one small SEN room accommodating six pupils, meaning many others are taught in mainstream classes without proper facilities or spaces. Earlier this year, I helped the school to fight for a single SNA to add to its group. It is unfair to these children and to the teachers who are doing their utmost with so few resources. That is why this planned 20-classroom school is not just welcome; it is essential. It will provide four purpose-built special education classrooms, fully integrated into the main building with wheelchair access, sensory rooms, shower facilities and breakout spaces. It will finally give those children the environment they need to learn, develop and flourish with dignity.

I spoke yesterday to the principal, Jane Kirwan, who told me that the school is happy to have a 20-mainstream-class school instead of a 24-mainstream-class school, and can only presume that this number has the evidence to back up what is coming down the tracks over the next ten years. There are a huge number of estates currently being built in the town and in and around the school’s parish, not to mention the influx of those coming from abroad. The school turns families away on a weekly basis.

This project has faced decades of delay and disappointment. It was originally approved as a 24-classroom build. It was paused around the time of the general election last year and later reduced to a 20-classroom build. Planning permission was first submitted in June 2021. After a lengthy appeal, An Bord Pleanála granted approval in April 2022. Since then, the progress has been painfully slow. The Department's own records show that the project is now at tender stage, but the school community really needs certainty. It needs a clear timeline for when the tender will be completed, when construction will begin, and when the pupils and staff of Marymount National School will finally step into the modern school they deserve.

Let us remember that this is not just bricks and mortar. For Drogheda, which is Ireland's largest town and is soon to be a city, this school represents a commitment to the future. Marymount National School has been the heart of that community since the 1960s. It has provided care, compassion and education under ever-increasing pressure. The staff, parents and children have waited long enough. They have done their part by making huge concessions to their original plans. Now it is time for the Department to do its part.

I ask the Minister of State to make a clear commitment that this project will move further without further delay and that these children, including those with the greatest needs, will not have to spend another winter learning in damp, cold classrooms. For the town and the community, this is much more than a school building; it is a promise that every child in this rapidly growing area deserves to learn in safety, comfort and dignity.

I thank Senator Comyn for raising this matter as it provides me with an opportunity, on behalf of the Minister for Education and Youth, to outline to the Seanad the current position in relation to the major building project for Marymount National School in Drogheda, County Louth. The project is included in the Department of Education and Youth’s construction programme, which will be delivered under the national development plan as part of the Project Ireland 2024 framework. The brief for this project is the development of a new 24-mainstream-class primary school, plus four classrooms for pupils with special educational needs, along with one home school liaison room on the existing site.

Stage 1 for Marymount National School was approved in February 2013, as the Senator said. Stage 2A was approved in September 2015 following the submission of an addendum report. Due to an unresolvable dispute with regard to design team fees, the regional design team was replaced in November 2016 and works began on stage 2B of the building project. As the Senator said, there are decades of issues here. In mid-2017, the board of management advised the Department that it could acquire additional land from Louth County Council for the school building project. The original site was extremely restrictive, and the acquisition of this land eliminated the need for a phased delivery of the project. The sale closed in July 2018. The planning application was submitted in June 2021, and was initially granted after a request for further information.

However, an appeal was lodged to An Coimisiún Pleanála in January 2022 which delayed the granting of planning permission until April 2022. Following this, the stage 2 report was approved in September 2024 and the project moved to the current stage. This major building project is currently at stage 3, tender action evaluation and award, and the Department is currently reviewing tender report number 2, which is subject to due diligence by the Department. This is a critical part of the overall completion of the stage 3 process and vital for ensuring quality and value for money.

In July the Government announced a capital allocation of €7.5 billion for the Department of Education and Youth for the period 2026 to 2030 under the national development plan. As part of the NDP allocation, the Department will place a strong emphasis on provision for children with special educational needs, with a particular focus on meeting annual school place needs. In relation to the project roll-out for large-scale projects and additional school accommodation scheme projects, the approach will be to continue to maximise the capacity of the existing school estate as much as possible in the first instance and to provide necessary additional capacity through targeted and prioritised project roll-out over the 2026 to 2030 period to meet the most urgent and prioritised needs

I thank the Minister of State for outlining what, I am afraid, we already knew, which is the very long and varied history of this particular school dating back to 2013, which I did not even mention. This has been 12 years in the pipeline. I note the Minister of State's response and the commitment from the Department on providing schools but there is no mention of this particular school. What they want to know is the timeline for this school. Diggers were supposed to have been on-site last summer but that did not happen. They went back and made compromises to try to provide a school and they need to know. They are no further down the line. The Minister of State has not mentioned when it is going to go ahead, when a builder is going to be chosen and when they will have diggers on the site. That is exactly what the parents, the staff and, most importantly, the pupils want to know. They are in dire need of new classrooms but I am still no clearer as to when that is going to happen.

I thank the Senator. She has made it quite clear that she needs a timeline. She expected that the diggers would be on-site last summer. Unfortunately, I do not have any timelines for her but I will bring her concerns back to the Minister. The sectoral plans for the education and youth sector will be published next week and the first tranche of projects to progress to construction will be published in January. The NDP implementation guide will optimise outputs from the NDP allocations with a strong focus on maximising existing school capacity, progressing priority projects for local capacity across schools in areas deemed insufficient, ensuring delivery that is affordable, offers value for money and meets functional needs. Effectively, the sectoral plan will be published next week and hopefully the school will be in that sectoral plan. I will bring the Senator's concerns back to the Minister.

The Minister of State is very welcome. This is my first time to address him since he was re-elevated and I congratulate him on that. I am delighted to see him in post and am sure that the people over in north west are also delighted to see him in post as well.

Recently I spoke in this House about a serious matter concerning the taxi industry and today I would like to address the current regulatory issues affecting the industry. I raised serious concerns in the House about companies holding up to 200 taxi plates and renting them out at rates of between €100 and €200 per week. Just last week I travelled in a taxi whose driver was paying €200 per week to rent a plate. That is €10,400 per year before vehicle maintenance, insurance, rental and fuel costs are factored in. Many drivers effectively work the first three days of the week just to pay the cost of running the car. When deregulation was brought in, the idea was to create more competition in the industry and to make taxis better value for money for ordinary citizens.

I understand, anecdotally, that there are individuals in this city who hold 100 or 200 plates, some of whom are absent landlords living outside the State. This raises fundamental questions. Is this consistent with the original rationale for deregulation? How can we be sure those who are driving taxis have the necessary qualification, have passed the public service vehicle test, are properly insured and meet the safety standards? If I can rent a plate from somebody and stick up some sort of a form on my window, is anybody going to stop me and check that I have actually qualified to drive the car? Who allowed one individual to purchase 200 plates and rent them out at exorbitant sums like €10,400 a year? It is an enormous sum for somebody who does not even drive a taxi. We find that there are taxis on the road 24 hours a day, as two people may choose to rent the same plate or share the rental of the plate.

Every person has a right to earn a living and that includes taxi drivers, so I have no difficulty with taxi drivers and the rates they charge. However, in recent years we have seen the growth of taxi call centres. Freenow was the first one into the country and Uber is here now. They are great services. I can pick up the phone or go to my app and hail a taxi, and that is fantastic but let us take an example I was given last week. A person booked a taxi from one of the platforms to go to Dublin Airport from Cabinteely. The cost of the taxi was quoted at €66. The person agreed to the charge outlined for them. What happened then? The company involved contacted the taxi drivers and said, "I have a trip from Cabinteely to Dublin Airport and I am offering €30 for it. Who wants to take it?". If nobody takes it at €30, it will increase it to €35. If nobody takes it at €35, it will increase again.

Effectively, what we have is the very people who could introduce competition to the system by asking drivers to bid for runs are taking the fixed price and giving a greatly reduced price to the driver, making absolutely massive profits for themselves. This, I believe, is repugnant to the whole idea of deregulation. I understand the system in the UK is that some of these large companies are running a bidding competition for every trip. While the plan was to deregulate the system, these two issues are running against the notion of competition. One is the rental of a taxi plate. It should be one plate for one family - simple as that, or one plate for one driver. There should not be a capacity for anybody to own more than one plate and with regard to those who do own them, we should review the regulations and get back to a situation where every driver owns his own plate, or her own plate as the case may be. The other one then, of course, is the bidding. By all means, bid for runs but if you do, pass it on to the consumer. I look forward to the Minister of State's reply.

I thank the Senator for his question and I welcome the opportunity to discuss this important topic, which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Darragh O'Brien.

I wish to clarify that the National Transport Authority, NTA, is the independent transport regulator of the small public service vehicle, SPSV, sector,, that is, taxis and hackneys. The Minister for Transport is not involved in the day-to-day operation of that sector and notes recent developments regarding taxi protests.

Ireland has a robust regulatory framework for taxis and hackneys, which require that all drivers and vehicles be licensed as a means to protect the consumer and help ensure public safety. Furthermore, no special regulations have been developed to govern the carriage of passengers by passenger cars that are not small public service vehicles. Therefore, the classic model where anyone with a car and the relevant app may provide taxi services does not exist here. Protection of the consumer and personal safety are vital objectives and must continue to be central to how the SPSV industry is regulated and operated.

In November 2025, Uber Ireland introduced a new option on its platform, providing customers with a single maximum price for a trip before requesting.

The option is referred to on the platform as "taxi fixed price". Usually, when booking a taxi with Uber or other dispatch operators, a price range of the approximate cost of the journey is shown. With the Uber taxi-fixed-price option, the customer will now be provided with a maximum guaranteed price upfront. If the final price on the taximeter is less than the designated maximum price provided, users pay the lower price. If the final price on the taximeter is greater than the maximum price, users pay the maximum price.

From a legislative perspective, section 24 of the Consolidated Taxi Regulation Acts 2013 and 2016 empowers the NTA board to make a maximum fares order to fix the maximum fare that may be charged by the driver of a taxi for any journey. The current maximum fares order took effect in December 2024, and a maximum fare review is carried out approximately every two years. The NTA has conducted these reviews since 2011. Hackneys and limousines agree their fares in advance and do not use meters.

As set out in the legislation, charging more than the maximum fare can lead to prosecution. However, charging below the maximum fare is permitted. The Minister understands that the Uber fixed-price offer does not breach the maximum fare regulatory provisions for taxis. Neither does it constitute an offence associated with the misuse of taximeters set out by the NTA in the Small Public Service Vehicle (Fixed Payment Offences and Driver Licence Period) Regulations 2022. SPSV operators are self-employed and may decide whether or not to sign up with a licensed dispatch operator, such as Uber. They are not obliged to be affiliated with any dispatch operator. Where they choose to do so, taxi drivers are free to contract with a dispatch operator of their choice.

Neither the Minister nor the NTA are parties to the commercial or contractual arrangements between SPSV drivers and their dispatch operators. Accordingly, the Department and the NTA have no role in the approval of such matters.

Senator Craughwell raised that one individual, a family or company can have up to 100 or 200 plates. That is a very disturbing matter. I will bring the issue to the attention of the Minister.

I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive reply from the Department. When tabling this matter, I was aware that the Department has the NTA to oversee the industry, if one wants to put it like that. I thank the Minister of State for taking this matter, which I raised in order to discuss this matter of public concern. From what I understand, the fixed-price system used is not to the benefit of the consumer. Rather, it is to the benefit of the operator. Based on what we have heard today, first and foremost, could the NTA carry out a review immediately? I appreciate the fact that the NTA cannot be involved in a contract between a driver or service provider and a call centre.

If I were a taxi driver and I were being screwed like this, I would urge people to move away from the provider and to find one that would treat them in a fair and comprehensive way. I thank the Minister of State for his time.

As previously mentioned, the regulation of the SPSV industry, including the setting of fares, is a matter for the independent transport regulator, the NTA, to which Senator Craughwell alluded. Section 24 of the Consolidated Taxi Regulations Acts 2013 and 2016 vests power in the NTA board to make a maximum fares order that fixes the maximum fares that may be charged by a taxi driver. The NTA conducts fare reviews approximately every two years. The current maximum fares order took effect in December 2024. Taxi fixed price is a trip option introduced by Uber in Ireland where passengers see a single maximum price for their trip before requesting it. The Minister does understand that Uber taxi fixed price is also available in other jurisdictions such as Berlin, Brussels, in London for licensed black taxis that use the Uber app, and in Madrid. He also understands that how it works is that a price is displayed in advance showing the maximum fare for the ride and the user pays a lower meter fare or the maximum fare provided. I will bring the Senator's concerns back to the Minister.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank him for coming. I am raising an issue about Tailte Éireann. Tailte Éireann resulted from the merger of the Property Registration Authority, Valuation Office and Ordnance Survey Ireland. I was a member of the Oireachtas joint committee that scrutinised the legislation on this and teased out the issues. We warmly welcomed Tailte Éireann and its establishment. At that time, it promised many things. I had tabled the exact same Commencement matter previously. I look forward to a different response. I have the script and response. I would not mislead the Minister of State. That Commencement matter was on 26 February 2025. It relates to the need for the Minister of State from the Department to make a statement on the dealings and issues around the governance and the timely matter in which Tailte Éireann carries out or seeks to carry out its business and the problems that are associated with that.

The Incorporated Law Society of Ireland has run a number of commentaries on it. Solicitors up and down this country have concerns about Tailte Éireann. The Bar Council has concerns about it. I have ongoing experience with it, which I do not intend bringing in. My contribution is not motivated by my difficulties with Tailte Éireann. This situation relates to many farmers, house purchasers, sellers and people who wish to dispose of commercial property. We talk about dereliction, which the Minister of State know wells in his Ministry and his commitment to the restoration of our old towns and cities, croí cónaithe initiatives and all of that. Behind many of the derelict properties, we have issues about title, registration, probate or disputed ownership. This is where Tailte Éireann is critical. It was established to speed up these processes. We know that there are people going on for years waiting for a process. People have contacted Tailte Éireann and have been that told: "No, you cannot deal with us. You must go back to your solicitor."

I have a lot of documentation on this organisation. I spoke to a number of barristers and solicitors yesterday. I am saying advisedly that this organisation is simply not fit for purpose. We should carry out an audit of its functions. I do not come in here and knock things. I come in to highlight deficiencies and come up with positive suggestions. If a person applies for a passport today, it will be validated and then go on a tracker system. There is no such thing as an open tracker system. There is no open transparency and accountability about this organisation. We have built this monster called Tailte Éireann. Now it is suggested that it does not have resources. This is a closely aligned organisation with the Department. Does it have the resources? I do not want that excuse anymore. Does it have the manpower? Does it have the IT technologies, structures and software and hardware in place to manage it? This is an important arm of State. There are young people waiting who have lost deposits waiting for Tailte Éireann because the vendor has had a problem with Tailte Éireann.

Tailte Éireann is not fit for purpose as of today. I have substantial evidence to back that up. The citizens and solicitors who engage and make representations to Tailte Éireann on behalf of their clients should be able to track using a tracking system so that they can click in with their Tailte Éireann number to find out where they are in the line of the decision-making with the organisation. That is my ask. I have drafted a number of parliamentary questions. I am meeting a Deputy this week to talk about submitting them. I want to get the direct response from the Minister of State. Hopefully, we can put in place some mechanism of reform.

We have some former Ógra Fianna Fáil membership in the Visitors Gallery.

I thank Senator Boyhan for raising this issue. I will give him a detailed response. I hope there is some new material in there compared with what he has heard before, but in the response I think he will see that there has been an emphasis on recruitment and filling vacant posts, which I feel is acknowledgement from Tailte Éireann that it does not want to be a bottleneck in the process anymore and an acknowledgement that perhaps it has been in the past, but it is trying to smooth that out in terms of recruitment.

Tailte Éireann is an independent Government agency under the aegis of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Tailte Éireann provides a property registration system, property valuation service and national mapping and surveying infrastructure for the State. Under section 8 of the Tailte Éireann Act 2022, Tailte Éireann is independent in the performance of its functions. As such, as Minister of State, I have no role in the operational matters relating to its functions.

In 2023, a request for a planned increase in the pay bill subhead of Tailte Éireann's vote was supported by the Department and subsequently granted in the Estimates for 2024. As part of Tailte Éireann's resourcing strategy, an accelerated recruitment programme was launched in early 2024 to address the high volume of vacancies and strengthen operational capacities in response to the increasing service demands. The programme introduced standardised recruitment processes across internal and external mobility routes to ensure consistent and efficient staffing. Since its launch in February 2024, the Tailte Éireann resourcing team has focused on filling 147 priority roles. In addition, a further 276 vacancies, including 135 within the registration function, have been filled across Tailte Éireann through a combination of new hires, promotion and mobility placements. The remaining 71 active Tailte Éireann vacancies, 11 of which relate to the registration function, are currently progressing through various stages of the recruitment cycle with a target to reduce overall vacancy levels across Tailte Éireann to below 3% by the end of 2025.

The continued increase in applications received for registration by Tailte Éireann year over year and challenges in recruitment for some time now have resulted in longer processing times for certain application types. Tailte Éireann has responded proactively to these challenges with a significant number of new staffing being onboarded and currently progressing through initial training. As a result, Tailte Éireann is now operating with increased staffing levels, which will support ongoing improvements in the delivery of registration services and contribute to the timely processing of applications. Tailte Éireann has advised me that improvements have been made to date in throughput times, particularly in relation to cases that do not require mapping. I am confident that as the full complement of staff are successfully onboarded, it will be in a position to reduce waiting terms across all application types.

Outside of recruitment, every effort is being made by Tailte Éireann to reduce application processing times, including implementation of the following efficiency driving measures: revised procedures for more efficient handling of the large volume of applications that are lodged that are not in order to proceed to registration; a targeted approach to reduce the age profile of applications pending registration; revised internal processes aimed at reducing the volume of applications on hand that are not in order to proceed and remain under query; and an organisation-wide focus on reducing processing times with business process improvements now implemented across the organisation. Tailte Éireann also continues to promote its digital services and uptake of e-registration services where paperless application types are available to legal practitioners and financial institutions, which helps to reduce processing times for all the service users.

It is understood from Tailte Éireann that where an application is lodged fully in order for registration, the application will be registered without any long delay. Applications involving transfer of registered land where no change in the registered map is required are in the main processed within 15 working days. Processing times for transfers that do require a change to the map and those requiring first registration of property are improving. There is a small bit more information there about how to access that information, but I would be interested to hear the Senator's views and thoughts on that detail.

I thank the Minister of State. I did tell him it was Wednesday 26 February. The cut-and-paste sentences in the beginning are exactly the same but forget about that. People have to do a job, and I understand that. The Minister of State has shined a light in a few places. All of that, I dare say spiel, but, respectfully, all that the Minister of State read out there is about resources. There are 71 vacancies in an organisation that is two years old. This is the story that is told to the solicitors who ring up. I sat in a solicitor's office last Friday and what people are told when they ring up is that they cannot do anything about that. It is a disgrace if Tailte Éireann is not functioning for our farmers, farm lands, farm buildings, commercial people, residential people and young people trying to get property. It needs to, and I am calling on the Minister of State to use his powers and have a discussion with his management team and find out what is going to Tailte Éireann.

I will be writing to the Committee of Public Accounts because I believe we need to examine Tailte Éireann and its practices. It is not fit for purpose. I do not want to get into personal cases, but I know people who have been waiting for two or three years. The Minister of State said it takes 14 or 15 days. If there is a query, cases are left sitting and are not sent back.

When people ring up, they are refused a conversation. They are told they must go through their solicitors. I want to say it loud and clear: this organisation is simply not fit for purpose. It is not doing its job in a professional or timely manner. It is leaving farmers, businesspeople and people seeking homes in distress and leaving many issues unresolved. I know the Minister of State will have to investigate all of that, but I ask him to commit to a root-and-branch review of the organisation. I will contact the members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, under whose remit this body falls, to ask to bring in representatives of Tailte Éireann as early in the new year as possible. There are big problems here that impact the Minister of State's constituents and mine.

I completely understand. The Senator is representing people who are being frustrated by this process and who are agitated by it. I totally understand. Fair play to the Senator for representing those people.

As I outlined, I cannot get into the weeds in terms of the day-to-day running of the organisation. If Tailte Éireann has requests for me or the Department that will help to improve efficiency, we are there for those. It is onboarding staff who are now in the training phase. I hope that when that onboarding and training are complete, we will see further efficiency.

I also referenced that the organisation is making a lot of operating changes. It is revising its procedures to ensure it does not become a bottleneck in the process. Work is ongoing. I ask for a bit of patience, although I acknowledge that the Senator raised the issue in February. Let us see how the onboarding and training go and give Tailte Éireann a chance to ensure it can work out a lot of those issues.

The Minister of State is welcome. He has answered more of my Commencement matters than anybody else this year. If the Minister of State, Deputy Feighan, had been appointed sooner, he would be up there with the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan. I thank him for that.

The local development levy waiver scheme has been one of the most effective measures introduced to support people to begin building at a time of rising cost and uncertainty. It formed part of a wider suite of actions that helped to deliver housing commencements in recent years and it must be commended. More than 60,000 households have directly benefited from the temporary waiver. It has played an important role in keeping projects viable in communities right across the country. The scheme is now closed to new applicants and those who have been approved have until December 2026 to complete their build. It is important because development contributions can range from €4,000 to over €12,000, depending on the local authority, so for many families, that level of support meant the difference between moving ahead and putting their plans on hold.

I want to raise an issue that has come up repeatedly with people in my area. These are people who genuinely acted in good faith and commenced their build within the correct timeframe but did not realise they needed to submit a separate application for the waiver before the closing date. Some were unaware, some misunderstood the process, while others assumed that beginning their build on time automatically qualified them for the waiver. These families are not now asking for special treatment. They simply believe that they need a hand. They believed they were doing everything right. They moved forward when the Government asked them to do so. They are still working hard to complete their homes in time to meet that 2026 deadline. They now find themselves facing unexpected bills of €5,000, €10,000 or more that they had every reason to believe would have been waived under the scheme's remit.

This situation is more strongly felt in rural Ireland, where many of these one-off houses are located. Unlike urban developments, rural households do not receive or benefit from the same public lighting, footpaths and connections to public sewerage as urban households. They have to install their own septic tanks and maintain their own infrastructure. The shoulder the costs that urban households face, yet they also pay the same development contributions despite receiving none of the local authority services in return. For many, that has always felt like a heavy and somewhat confusing burden.

Now, with the waiver closed, the additional financial pressure is causing real distress among people who believe, honestly and reasonably, that they have met the guidelines on time. These families are building their own homes. It is often their first or forever home. They are not developers or speculators; they are people trying to put down roots in their own communities. I am not calling for a reopening of the entire scheme, but I believe that a fair and practical path - a one-off inclusion mechanism for this limited group - for those who can demonstrate they commenced on time within the qualifying period and are on track to finish before December 2026 would honour the spirit of the waiver without undermining the structure of the scheme.

This approach would recognise genuine good faith efforts. It would support households who stepped up when the Government encouraged people to build. It would ensure no family is left carrying an unexpected burden because of an administrative misunderstanding. We have seen the power of this scheme in the commencements in construction activity and the confidence it gives families. A small adjustment now would reinforce those achievements and show that the system remains compassionate, responsive and fair. I acknowledge the progress that has been made and I look forward to hearing the Minister of State's answer.

I thank the Senator for raising the issue. He made the interesting point that I take many of his Commencement matters. I would say that is because I am in the Department of housing. The Senator has been a champion for the housing issue. In fairness, he tries to raise it on every possible occasion. That is probably why I am getting many of them.

The qualification criteria for this scheme are pretty black and white. It will be difficult to try to open it up again. I doubt there are many people in the cohort the Senator is representing. He is talking about individuals, in most cases, who are just trying to get a start in life. Notwithstanding what it says in the prepared response, I will give an undertaking to approach my Department to see if there is any hope that these people can be catered for. I do not want to overpromise because there may be some impediment to that.

The purpose of the development contribution levies is to provide funding to assist local authorities in the provision of necessary public infrastructure and facilities to support development. The contribution levies are charged by all planning authorities as a condition of planning permission for all forms of development proposals, including residential, and are collectible before or on commencement of the relevant development works. The rate of contribution applied may vary by unit size or type, or by geographical area.

On 25 April 2023, the Government approved additional measures under the Housing for All action plan to incentivise the activation of increased housing supply and to help to reduce housing construction costs. These measures included the introduction of temporary time-limited arrangements for the waving of local authority section 48 development contributions, and the refunding of Uisce Éireann water and wastewater connection charges. The Government recognised that further measures needed to be put in place to help to address cost and viability, with a view to incentivising the activation of a pipeline of new commencements and assisting in the delivery of supply as quickly as possible. The waiver scheme was applied to all permitted residential development, including multi-unit developments, self-built and one-off houses, student accommodation and sheltered housing schemes. It initially applied for one year to all permitted residential development commenced on site between 25 April 2023 and 24 April 2024 and completed no later than 31 December 2025.

On 23 April 2024, the Government approved an extension of the waiving of the local authority section 48 development contributions in respect of residential development commenced no later than 31 December 2024 and the refunding of Uisce Éireann water and wastewater connection charges in respect of residential development commenced no later than 30 November 2024. In April 2024, the final date for the completion of development works on qualifying houses under the schemes was extended for a further year, from 31 December 2025 to 31 December 2026. There will be no further extension of the use of the waiver scheme to further extend the required completion date within which housing development that has commenced must be completed to secure the waiver.

The answer I have given the Senator talks about the completion dates, and not necessarily about the deadline for application which is more specifically what he is referring to. I suggest, without creating a level of expectation, that I will ask officials to look at it again, especially where people building one-off houses and their first homes were, for whatever reason, unaware of the waiver or the deadline for application for the waiver.

However, that is as far as the commitment can go because there may be impediments to allowing that cohort of people back in. I get it; I also have those constituents. It seems a bit unfair because that is exactly the type of person this was supposed to benefit.

I thank the Minister of State. The number is small. In my own local authority I believe there is a maximum of 40 applicants. Considering this scheme has benefited over 60,000 people, it has done what it was created to do. I understand it was created as a temporary measure. It was designed and introduced to make building viable. Under facilitating investment and addressing viability, the programme for Government that the Minister of State and I, and all my colleagues, signed up for commits to measures such as development levy waivers, Uisce Éireann connection charge rebates and the croí cónaithe scheme. We know the great work happening in all those areas. What the local authority officials told me is that the small number of people who believed they were on the scheme but have been told they cannot avail of it, the local authority has no scheme from which to draw down the waiver to get it back and that is the only blockage that I am trying to relieve. I thank the Minister of State for his answer.

Is the Senator talking about multi-unit developments as well?

Single.

It is single one-off developments. That is where the focus should be. I will ask officials to look at this again and try to do a cost-benefit analysis on what it would cost the State if we allowed a small cohort who will have built and completed within the appropriate period but who, for whatever reason, missed out on the deadline for the application. They must be very annoyed and frustrated. They are taxpayers as well and a lot of that would be funding the scheme. I will undertake to do that.