Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands díospóireacht

Energy Poverty: Discussion (Resumed)

An Cathaoirleach

Apologies have been received from Deputy Joan Collins, who is in the Dáil Chamber this morning. Members are required to participate in the meeting remotely from within the Leinster House precincts only. I welcome the witnesses. They are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the presentation they make to the committee. This means that they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything you say at this meeting. However, they are not expected to abuse this privilege and it is my duty as Cathaoirleach to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue your remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that you should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity.

Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person or entity outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The committee will consider the impact of energy poverty and the retrofitting of homes in rural and urban areas. This is the fourth meeting the committee has held on this topic. Today, the committee is considering the effectiveness of the fuel allowance and the retrofitting of homes on some of the most vulnerable households in Ireland, namely those with limited financial resources and those facing health challenges. The committee is always interested in the lived experiences of those facing energy hardship and its impact on our climate, but also how we can modify policy to ensure that these homes are warm and healthy places to live. I would like to welcome Ms Averil Power, CEO, and Ms Anna Drynan-Gale, team lead of the night nursing service, Irish Cancer Society, ICS; Dr. Suzanne Denieffe, head of the school of humanities, South East Technological University, SETU; and Ms Clare O'Connor, energy policy officer, and Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly, head of policy, Friends of the Earth.

I invite Ms Power to make her opening statement.

Ms Averil Power

On behalf of my colleague, Irish Cancer Society night nursing team leader, Ms Anna Drynan-Gale, and Dr. Suzanne Denieffe, from South East Technological University, I thank committee members for inviting us here today. The Irish Cancer Society’s vision is that one day no one in Ireland will die of cancer, but this vision is not yet a reality. While more people are surviving all the time, cancer is still the single largest cause of death in Ireland, with more than 9,000 people dying each year from the disease.

The majority of people would prefer to die at home. The ICS made that possible for more than 1,900 people with cancer last year by providing a free in-home night nursing service. People who use the service frequently tell us that it meant the world to the person who was dying and their loved ones that they could spend their final nights at home. However, we have also heard from our nurses about very poor living conditions in some of the homes they visit, including inadequate heating. This is particularly concerning because people with cancer patients, as a result of their treatment and condition, are particularly vulnerable to the cold.

We wanted to better understand the extent of this problem and what can be done to address it and, therefore, we funded Dr. Suzanne Denieffe and her team to carry out research, with input from patients, carers, nurses and energy providers. The findings were stark. Only 13% of nurses reported that the homes where they provided support were always adequately warm. One third of nurses had experienced a case where they felt the person they were caring for had to go without heating. Almost one third of nurses reported that a person they had cared for, or their family, had initiated a conversation about energy hardship. Half of the nurses believed someone they had cared for was struggling to make ends meet financially.

The nurses spoke of people living with mould, damp, condensation and draughts. Some stayed in bed because they could not afford to heat more than one room. Others went without heating altogether. One carer spoke about the need to keep the house warm as visitors arrived to spend time with their dying relative. The same person explained that their household costs decreased when their loved one went into hospice care. This left the carer feeling distressed, because on the one had some financial pressure had been relieved but on the other they questioned whether they should have kept the dying person at home for longer. Another carer spoke about hiding energy bills from their loved one so they would not have to worry about them.

In general, there was low awareness or uptake of various existing energy hardship interventions or the possibility of registering as a vulnerable customer on medical grounds. The winter energy credit scheme was widely welcomed. There was a desire for State supports to consider health-based needs, alongside any means-testing applied. Several of the participants mentioned the energy efficiency of their housing and said they were living in old, poorly insulated houses. The cost of upgrades was mentioned as a barrier to changing this.

Overall, this energy hardship report illustrates harsh realities thrust upon people with a life-limiting cancer diagnosis and their families throughout their end-of-life journey. This problem cannot remain hidden behind closed doors. It is a public issue. How we treat and support people at the end of their life, which is such a vulnerable time, says everything about who we are as a society. It is incumbent on policymakers to design a fair system to protect people at the end of their life and their loved ones.

In particular, the Government should provide an automatic entitlement to the household benefits package, fuel allowance payment and additional needs payment to people with a life-limiting cancer diagnosis without means-testing. It should also provide energy credits for the remainder of a person’s life and prioritise households with people receiving palliative care for SEAI grants to reduce waiting times.

To conclude, to think of anybody in their final days not having adequate heating is heartbreaking. To consider that this is a reality in Ireland in 2024 is shocking. Often, conversations around death and dying are necessarily complex and nuanced, but not this one. Our message is simple and irrefutable: everyone should live well at the end of life. No one should spend their final days shivering or wrapped around a hot water bottle because they cannot afford heating or worrying about how their families will pay the bills after they are gone. I thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to lay bare the sad reality that too many families are finding themselves in today and I urge it to work with us to change it.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Power.

Ms Clare O'Connor

I thank the Chair and members of the committee for the opportunity to address the important issue of energy poverty on behalf of Friends of the Earth.

Friends of the Earth is committed to advocating for faster and fairer climate action; this means a rapid reduction in emissions, in line with our carbon budgets and in a way in which everyone can benefit from, and which does not result in increased inequality. Addressing energy poverty alongside emissions reductions is a vital step in ensuring the realisation of the sustainable development goals of leaving no one behind in this transition and reaching the furthest behind first. We wholeheartedly welcome the committee's focus on this issue and we appreciate the in-depth debate that has happened over the past number of weeks. We believe the committee has established a comprehensive overview of the current challenges and barriers to addressing energy poverty and I will therefore focus this statement on putting forward solutions that address energy poverty that are also aligned with ambitious climate action. I will speak to six key areas to address this.

As for the accessibility of Government retrofitting schemes, we welcome the continued expansion of the warmer homes scheme, which is a positive example of how Government can tackle energy poverty and emissions reductions effectively. Despite these steps, we still see many households falling through the cracks as they do not have the upfront capital to avail of the general SEAI grants and they fall outside the eligibility for the warmer homes scheme. Tenants in the private rental sector in particular are excluded from this scheme. Therefore, we recommend that the warmer homes scheme be expanded to ensure that all low-income households in low BER homes are eligible, regardless of home ownership status.

The first step to this is to include tenants in receipt of HAP, on the condition of a long-term lease being offered to those tenants. We also recommend a targeted approach to both the warmer homes scheme and to the local authority retrofit schemes whereby the areas most at risk of energy poverty are identified and prioritised across these schemes, as well as for project aggregation.

As for the matter of fossil fuel lock-in, I wish to preface this by noting that Ireland currently has the lowest levels of renewable heat across the EU. Friends of the Earth is extremely concerned around the slow roll out of renewable heat across Ireland and is particularly concerned that the warmer homes scheme continues to install oil and gas boilers into the homes of people at risk of energy poverty. In doing so, it locks these households into burning fossil fuels for at least the next decade, possibly two decades. We are risking effectively creating a two-tier energy system whereby wealthier households have the agency to move off fossil fuels and to reap the benefits of decarbonisation, while those on lower incomes are locked into burning fossil fuels that will become more expensive and more polluting. Therefore, we recommend that all households who are eligible for the warmer homes scheme are given the opportunity to avail of renewable heat such as district heating and heat pumps. That would ensure that they are not locked into fossil fuels. We recommend that the Government reviews and updates the mandate of Government bodies, such as Gas Networks Ireland, to prevent the expansion of gas networks and fossil fuel lock-in.

We note the need for cross-departmental collaboration on such a complex issue as energy poverty. We commend the committee's inclusion of relevant Departments and civil society organisations at these meetings. It should be noted that many of the recent recommendations from the European Commission on energy poverty focus on the need for member states to ensure that energy poverty is included in wider and integrated social policies and the need for holistic, cross-departmental collaboration. This is particularly relevant at the moment, given the upcoming review and update of the Government's energy poverty action plan which will require a whole-of-government approach if it is to effectively tackle the structural causes of energy poverty. We recommend the establishment of a national cross-disciplinary working group on energy poverty that includes civil society organisations, supports development and implementation of the upcoming energy poverty plan and incorporates recommendations from the European Commission's guidance on energy poverty. We also recommend that the new energy poverty strategy sets targets for a reduction of energy poverty and that the strategy is placed on a statutory footing.

The issue of energy affordability forms a cornerstone to addressing energy poverty. Income supplements like the fuel allowance are vital. However, they often fall short of addressing the structural issues of high energy costs. Alongside increasing all social welfare rates to address insufficient incomes, we recommend that consideration be given to redesigning the fuel allowance such as a year-round, tiered payment with eligibility based on BER and household incomes. I refer to the energy guarantee scheme, which has been recommended by Age Action and the Vincentian MESL Research Centre. We recommend that support for renewable technology is included in the energy poverty schemes to reduce energy costs such as including solar PV in the warmer homes scheme and widening the roll out of innovative approaches like EnergyCloud to include local authority homes and people who are on waiting lists for the warmer homer scheme as well. I am aware EnergyCloud were before the committee last week as well.

Retrofitting of social housing and approved housing bodies, AHBs, is a key opportunity to enhance energy efficiency and alleviate energy vulnerability. Current Government targets are set at just 25% of all social housing to be retrofitted by 2030. We see an opportunity for increased targets. The Department could set a more ambitious target to retrofit all social housing by 2030. They could prioritise the worst performing houses and include a multi-year strategy for local authorities and AHBs so they would have clarity on multi-year funding. This would require increased funding for both of these cohorts.

Lastly, community engagement and accessibility of information on retrofitting and energy poverty are paramount. A proactive approach must be taken by the State to go to directly to communities with this information and to support households directly with retrofitting. We propose the establishment of a community energy advice service in every local authority to provide a local, tailored support service so people can access the financial advice they need. It would collaborate with civil society organisations to identify households that are at risk of energy poverty and target them in a retrofitting scheme and provide support in applying for retrofitting grants as well as support throughout the retrofitting process. We also recommend leveraging partnerships with existing community groups that are trusted within communities, such as sports clubs, to foster climate awareness and action and to co-create tailored solutions that work for local communities based on their needs.

In conclusion, I reiterate our gratitude to the committee's commitment to addressing this issue and we hope that all our long list of recommendations is included in the committee's upcoming report. I thank the committee.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms O'Connor. I will take questions from members. The first member to indicate is the Leas-Cathaoirleach, Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I thank the witnesses. I hope the witnesses from Friends of the Earth do not mind that I particularly thank the representatives of the Irish Cancer Society. I attended the launch of its report last week and I was moved by the testimony of John Joyce, who described with great bravery and dignity some of the challenges that people face towards the end of their lives.

My first question is not really a question, but rather an opportunity to comment. I found the testimony of night nurses really striking and moving. They have shown that they can be a powerful voice for people who feel too vulnerable, exposed or burnt out to advocate on their own behalf. Can Ms Drynan-Gale share some of those stories that night nurses have shared with Dr. Suzanne Denieffe in the course of her research? The term "energy poverty" does not bring home the individual circumstance, and the witnesses from the Irish Cancer Society have a window into the actual lived experience. I believe it would be of great value to the committee to hear it.

Ms Anna Drynan-Gale

I am privileged to have worked in a night nursing role and to have that exceptional ability to observe first-hand families in homes experiencing energy hardship and what that actually looks like in reality. Dr. Denieffe's research findings have now given us empirical evidence of what we have observed over the years, including mould, damp and condensation that all adversely contribute to a person's ill health in a significant way. The patients we look after are patients who have exhausted huge lines of therapy, sometimes they are through their third or fourth line of therapy. They have been ill for a long time. Often, when patients enter the terminal phase, they are quite cachectic and they do not have body mass to support themselves. We already know that they have a much higher energy requirement for heating because they do not have the ability to do that themselves.

As I stated at the launch last week, I have seen first-hand families sit at a beside vigil in their loved ones last moments of life clothed in blankets, duvets, coats, and even hats. It is a significant difficulty for a lot of patients. A lot of families are embarrassed, ashamed or feel stigmatised and they do not feel enabled to reach out to energy providers to help support and care for them. The saddest observation from Dr. Denieffe's study is a family member who questioned whether they did the right thing in bringing a loved one home because the family member could not adequately support the heating requirements of that home.

Moving on to the issue fo energy affordability which is a cornerstone of addressing energy poverty. We see income supplements like the fuel allowance as vital. However, they often fall short of addressing the structural issues of high energy costs. Alongside increasing all social welfare rates toa ddress insufficient incomes, we recommend that consideration be given to redesignign the fuel allowance. For example, a year round tiered payment with elegibility based on BER as well as household income, such as the energy guarantee scheme which has been recommended by Age Action and the MESL Research Centre. We also recommend that support for renewable technology is included in the energy poverty schemes to reduce energy costs such as t

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

What has to be acknowledged is the huge societal service that families who take the decision to care for a loved one at home at end of life do. It is an enormous contribution to society. It is a huge decision for any family and we should do all in our power to support a family that decides to shoulder that burden for the sake of the love they have for a family member. They should not be made to bear an additional cost as they have enough on their plates in terms of worry. Having to register as vulnerable customer, how are you going to have the headspace to be able to do that? The solar PV scheme for medically vulnerable homes is brilliant. I am delighted it is there, but where is a vulnerable person going to get the headspace to be able to get three quotes for panels on the roof or wherever? Maybe Dr. Denieffe could speak about what the actual functional barriers are and whether there are schemes available. I mention changing you energy provider. I cannot get the wherewithal to change my energy provider because I have to get the kids to school, much less caring for a relative at the end of life. Maybe Dr. Denieffe could talk about those simple, institutional barriers, which it makes all sorts of sense for us to work to remove.

Dr. Suzanne Denieffe

I thank the Deputy. That was a really good point. The respondents, the patients and the family carers, we interviewed spoke of the difficulties they had in changing energy provider. They could not understand the contracts and they were not able to understand and to compare the costs. A key point they made was that most of this information is digital and there is very much a digital divide. It is not just age specific. One of the respondents in her 30s talked about the difficulty she had in looking for information online. What happens is that when people perceive this difficulty, they give up and they do not even think about doing it. That is a uniform finding across all of the respondents. We need to make it easier for them. We need to link people up with people they can phone because many of these people can cope better over the telephone, or use local resources such a libraries and information centres more effectively to reach out so they can access this information more easily and understand it and be supported to understand it. Certainly there is a role for public services - for libraries and local authorities - along with the energy providers to make it easier for people.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I would like to pick up that point with Friends of the Earth as it is a common recommendation. I am very interested in - and we discussed this at the committee previously - the middle piece, the energy transition. Retrofitting is a long-term goal, although not for everybody as some are getting there already, but it is going to be a while before we reach all housing stock. I am interested in what we can do in that medium term, that interim piece. On this idea of a community energy adviser, we have spoken before about a role for the CRU in this. We have spoken about the fact that most houses now have a smart meter installed but trying to get and then decipher the information from your smart meter and translating that to the energy plan that is going to sit best with you is very difficult. I think that information from the smart meters is wide open for the provision of energy credits to vulnerable customers. We absolutely have to move the responsibility. We know if somebody has a cancer diagnosis so why would we put the onus on those families to reach out as vulnerable customers, particularly if they are being provided palliative care at home? We know these people, so why would put a barrier in front of them and say, "You have to go and find this process?" The CRU has a huge role to play in this.

I want to let Friends of the Earth explore the idea of a community energy adviser, as I know it is in its still left out in the cold report. This could be hugely important and would not require a large number of people and it would be about linking people with their information to improve their lot right now, without any other interventions, and using the information we have available to help them live better, more comfortable lives in a way that is going to have benefits for the grid and in terms of emissions. There is nothing but wins here as far as I am concerned. I want give Friends of the Earth the opportunity to explore that in a bit more detail for us.

Ms Clare O'Connor

I fully agree with Deputy Ó Cathasaigh that it is a very implementable and achievable thing to do, that is, to deploy community energy advice services. It would be vital that this service link in with the Irish Cancer Society and other NGOs dealing directly with people in that lived experience of energy poverty so they can identify who needs that advice and have that more proactive approach to getting that information out. There are some good grants out there and the information is there but it is that issue of getting that information to people in really difficult circumstances and that is where community energy advice service would come in, linking that information and the grants that are out there with people who are most in need and do not have the capacity a lot of the time to proactively go and get that information. There are also issues around digital literacy. At the moment, you are expected to navigate the SEAI website to find information about grants. I am working in energy and I would still struggle to navigate that website as it is quite difficult. A more proactive approach is needed and whether that is through the local authorities, the SEAI website or a separate entity, we need to iron that out.

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

We would definitely agree with that recommendation on energy advisers. We would also agree with the recommendation that people, whether it is healthcare professionals, social care workers or other individuals within the community, not only recognise energy deprivation or energy poverty, but have access to the most important information on relevant schemes, both in relation to energy suppliers and SEAI grants.

Deputy Ó Cathasaigh has hit the nail on the head that when you stand back from all of this, the reason we are talking about individuals within the community with the relevant expertise is that at the moment all the responsibility rests on the individual and that is common to all of us, but we are particularly interested in those who are most at risk and those who are on lower incomes. We have a particular issue in Friends of the Earth with the roll-out of relevant energy efficiency measures. In most cases the responsibility rests on the individual to access them even before you get to digital literacy and the ability to understand the information. That is why we have recommended - and my colleague, Ms Clare O'Connor mentioned this already - leaving to one side updating, revising and expanding relevant schemes, which we can go into. There is a real need to review the mandates and functions of relevant State bodies and that includes the CRU but it also the SEAI and local authorities.

I appreciate that when we say review the mandates and functions, we may ask what the impact on expenditure will be. Are we simply talking about increased funding? The answer is "No" and that is why I also mentioned - and we are very happy to be speaking alongside the Irish Cancer Society today - the need for the likes of the SEAI and its schemes to work with anti-poverty organisations, whether in form of a working group or an advisory group, because, to reiterate, the real concern for Friends of the Earth is that we are particularly focused on the need to reduce emissions and decarbonise homes but that fundamentally lower income households will be left out of these transitions if it is left to the individual and to those who have the means over the coming years to install the likes of heat pumps and solar panels.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

That is the just transition piece.

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Exactly.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

The SDG were referenced and this committee has done a lot of work on them. If we are making this transition, we have to reach those who are furthest behind first. These are inseparable. I have oodles more questions but I am conscious of other members wanting to come in, so I will come back in-----

An Cathaoirleach

I have given Deputy Ó Cathasaigh who is the Leas-Chathaoirleach of the committee, a bit more scope as he attended the presentation last week on behalf of the committee. If I get a block of questions from members, we will put them to the panellists. Could the witnesses try to keep their responses succinct as we have just one hour for this particular session? I call Deputy Ó Laoghaire.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I thank the witnesses from Friends of the Earth and the Irish Cancer Society. They have really added to what I think has been an excellent set of sessions.

A lot of the same themes have arisen and I will be as succinct as I can.

The ICS has made very logical and coherent recommendations and it would be hard to argue with them. Regarding the recommendation about the SEAI, obviously it is not the case that people with life-limiting forms of cancer are prioritised. I am extremely sympathetic to the very logical recommendation given the situation in which people find themselves. The last thing ill people want to be thinking about is how much bills will cost and having to make decisions about whether to heat the house. Has contact been made with the SEAI and has the authority explored whether it is possible to prioritise in that regard?

On a related issue, the Department of Social Protection for good and for bad, but often for good, can create challenges. It likes criteria and rules that are strict, comprehensible and easily applicable. Is it the case, and it may well be as I am not familiar enough to know, that it is easy to define what is life limiting? Will the witnesses please expand on that?

I have a few questions for the Friends of the Earth on topics that have arisen. On the approach that has been taken, heat pumps are a huge part of the ball game. However, there is no point installing heat pumps in a house that is single leaf block on edge, and has old, single-glazed windows, bad doors, no roof insulation, etc. Everything must move forward in unison and it sort of moves a little bit slowly. It is coherent and makes sense that we get the biggest bang for our buck for heat pumps in houses that have a good standard of energy efficiency other than a heat pump. Is there an interim solution? Can anything be done for the people who are not going to be reached in the next four or five years? Is it the case that we simply must reach the maximum number of people in the next four or five years?

I want to flag an issue but I do not know whether it comes up with the witnesses, as I have gotten different versions from local authorities. I have heard from some local authorities that the cost of retrofitting is more than what they get from the Government per unit at this stage in the game because the funding has not kept pace with the cost of construction inflation so the only cost-effective thing to do is large blocks of local authority apartments as there would be an economy of scale. A row of houses or even five or six houses on a street or one-off houses is not cost-effective and there is an issue with the funding that local authorities get that has slowed down the delivery of housing. To some extent, the big urban authorities have hit the low-hanging fruit, not all by any means, but a lot of the local authority apartment complexes have been started.

My final question is on an issue that continually crops up. Some of the poorest quality stock in the country are older private rented buildings. That is hard to address because as we have talked about, and rightly, the onus is on the individual. In those circumstances the onus is, to some extent, on the landlord so what is the incentive? The issue is whether the tenant even wants to pursue it. We. therefore, need a tenant that is interested, sympathetic landlords and a co-operative relationship, and even then the landlord needs to accepts that this is a worthwhile investment for a tenancy that might only last a year or two or whatever. That is a big challenge because an awful lot of people are on very low incomes or in receipt of HAP and so on are in the private rental sector.

Ms Averil Power

On the social protection rules and the need to have something that is easy to apply without having to set up a new scheme, that is something we were very conscious of so that is why our recommendations, in terms of immediate measures, are about extending existing schemes. We are not looking for a separate scheme for people with a life-limiting cancer diagnosis. We are calling for a widening of accessibility to existing schemes such as the fuel allowance, the household benefits package and the additional needs payment. We also propose that we use an existing definition in respect of end of life for emergency medical cards. We campaigned for emergency medical cards for a long time and are grateful for them. Thankfully, we were successful in achieving a definition to cover someone who is diagnosed with a terminal illness with an estimated 24 months or fewer to live. As Deputy Ó Cathasaigh said, medical professionals can certify that. We can get these people's oncologist, treating physician or GP to sign a certificate to certify that the expectation is that the person has less than two years to live. That is why we have stuck at existing definitions and schemes so that it is something that is easy to do without having to set up a new separate initiative.

On the SEAI, our initial approach was to write to and engage with the relevant Ministers. We are grateful that the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, has offered to meet us over the next few weeks. We intend to raise this issue with him and we can write directly to the SEAI.

On our recommendations in general, we would advocate for a mixture of short- and medium-term interventions. We very much align with everything that Ms O'Connor and Mr. Mac Evilly said about the just transition. Climate change is probably the greatest threat to health of this generation. We are part of the Climate and Health Alliance. It is something we feel very strongly about because people with cancer and other serious illnesses are more vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change, including flooding. The ability to get out of one's house in the event of extreme weather is much more difficult when someone has a serious health condition. There is treatment disruption, which we have seen, during things like hurricanes and flooding. Cancer services not being able to operate is an enormous risk to life and, therefore, we feel very strongly about the need to tackle climate change. There are also benefits, which is an issue relevant to this committee. I refer to the co-benefits for health of those measures. Things like active travel and cleaner air are enormous co-benefits for conditions like cancer where 40% of cancers are preventable. We would echo all of the recommendations and support them with equal passion. Our challenge is that there are people dying now. Every year, 9,000 people die. While the medium-term measures are really important, and it is essential we ensure that there is a just transition and focus, in particular, on lower-income in respect of energy measures and energy comfort, the reason we are talking about the fuel allowance and those measures is people need money right now. They need energy credits right now. We would love in time that there is no need to give people credits for dirty fuels but right now that is what people are reliant on and they need that immediate support to relieve both the emotional and financial distress that energy hardship is causing right now.

Ms Clare O'Connor

I will take the question on heat pumps first. Ultimately, the SEAI heat study that in 2022 said that the primary focus, if we are to reach net zero by 2050 - I wish it was 2030 - has to be on the electrification of our heating system, which will be primarily through heat pumps. There is a piece that has to be done on energy efficiency before we can install heat pumps in the majority of houses but that does mean we need to ramp up our retrofitting efforts first. We must ensure that we are focused on getting deep retrofit measures done in as many homes as possible so that we can install heat pumps.

The current requirements to get heat pumps installed in homes are quite high with regard to the heat loss indicator. The SEAI is currently piloting a scheme whereby it reduces the heat loss indicator and has slightly reduced the requirements needed for heat pumps to go into homes. As heat pumps improve, and their efficiency improves, it will not require the complete airtightness that has been required. Electrification of the national heating systems is the solution, based on the SEAI heat study, as well as district heating in urban areas that have access to waste heat.

On the question about private rental properties, we recommend that eligibility for the warmer homes scheme be expanded to include tenants in the private rental sector who receive HAP. Such a provision would target low-income renters. The Housing for All policy promised to introduce minimum BERs in the private rental sector from 2025. Unfortunately, we have not heard much about that. Next year will be 2025, yet no notice has been issued to landlords to let them know that a minimum BER requirement will be introduced for the private rental sector.

The regulatory piece really will be key to address that split incentive issue where landlords might not want their tenants to get it long term.

On expanding the warmer homes scheme to HAP tenants, it is very important that a long-term lease is offered to HAP tenants alongside the full deep retrofit as well so there is not that risk of "renovictions" or them getting evicted from their home while these retrofits are being carried out. When the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage officials come in later, we encourage the committee to perhaps ask about the status of the introduction of the minimum BERs and where exactly that is at the moment. Unfortunately, we are not hearing the communication and engagement that would be needed with landlords at the moment.

On social housing, a lot of the local authorities have hit the low-hanging fruit. A huge increase in funding will be needed for the retrofit programme realistically to deal with inflation and so on. A total of €85 million in 2022 and €90 million in 2024 was allocated to the scheme but that needs to increase again. The Department really needs to focus on retrofitting the worst performing local authority stock first if it is serious about tackling energy poverty. This is very important.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I thank Ms O'Connor. I must apologise as I need to leave early but I will be back.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

If I understood Ms Power correctly, she referred to providing a package to people who are medically certified as having two years or less to live. I understand what she is saying. There is a human problem, as I try to figure it out in my own mind. This issue comes before us as constituency politicians when a person comes in to query carer's allowance to do with a cancer diagnosis. In most cases, it is the caree that comes in so we are not stuck with the awkward questions. In many cases, the person who comes in to us is the person with the illness. In my experience of dealing with the people who have a serious cancer, most believe they are going to fight it. It is humanly difficult to ask somebody to get a letter saying there is a likelihood that he or she will be dead in two years when the person is sitting in front of you and you are trying to edge your way around it. How do we humanly deal with that problem? I am sure all my colleagues are confronted with the same issue. We might believe from what the person has said that this is the situation but we must get around that. From what the witness has said a clear cut statement must be sought. I presume that not everybody who has cancer would get this package because this would raise precedence for all sorts of conditions. Many people walking on the streets today have had cancer in their lives. I am curious as to whether this does cause an issue. Certainly it has caused similar issues for me in the past.

The other way of going at this is on a wider scale. I will first refer to medical cards, although I am aware we are not here to discuss medical cards but they have been mentioned. The medical card income thresholds has not been raised in years. It has been done for the over 70s but still it is four or five years since that happened and inflation keeps eating into that every year. We have not increased the guidelines since, I believe, 2018 for ordinary medical cards for ordinary people. There are two easy things that could be done, one of which is to radically increase the medical card income threshold. The advantage of that is if there is money, then more GP visit cards could be given out to the less well-off cohort. This is not putting more pressure on the GPs by people going more frequently to their GP. It is not shown that people without medical cards die younger; in fact, the evidence is the opposite. It is often easy to administer once we change the guidelines.

Another measure could be taken and this is a very strong proposal. It is so very simple that it is unbelievable we do not do it. People over 70 years of age get a medical card and the means threshold per week is €550 for single persons and €1,050 for a couple. All the time I hear from people whose means are reassessed again and again. I asked a question about that and 97% automatically get the cards again. As people get older, they get more fragile and more vulnerable in every way, including being susceptible to illness. One of the easy things we could do is say, "Once you are 70" - unless there is some suspicion the person has won the lotto or has defrauded the medical card system by giving wrong information. On the 99% expectation that people tell the truth, it is not worth the cost of mean-testing again and again, and the hassle and upset for people as they get older or more ill. I am also interested in the household benefits package in the context of the issues raised here.

The other measure is absolutely clear cut. If a person is in palliative care, a two-year waiting list for an SEAI grant is just bogus. I would even go so far as to say that if people have significant cancers that are confining them to home, or any other condition that confines them to home, they should just jump to the top of the list. We have that in the housing list. Such a measure would be even easier to implement because it just needs to be determined that the condition is one that confines the people to the home, and then they would just jump the queue. We have a process, a HMD form, for medical priority for housing lists and so on. That is my two questions there.

The submission from Fiends of the Earth was interesting. We are all here with experience of operating the schemes, the complexities, the eternal means-testing and so on. When a scheme is devised, it must be operable. I agree with the suggestion that local authority housing must be done faster. However, then I say, "Hang on, you want to grab all of the contractors and make an even longer list for those on the warmer homes scheme or living in older houses." Many of those people are actually living in very poor housing. Is the real problem that we just do not have enough workers in this business at the moment? Is money the problem or are there not enough tradesmen trained to retrofit housing? Should a huge amount of concentration go into training more people? In my experience we may try to encourage those living in very bad houses to go into the scheme and, in many cases, it is complex. Most Deputies will find this. People may have a lot of money and still would not have done up the house. They might have a lot of cash and no borrowings but they are worried about nursing home costs, for example. The fair deal scheme would only take some money off them but they do not understand the schemes. Reference was made to education. While there is information available, one of the biggest disincentives is the householder being told, "By the way they will not come out to inspect this for two years". When people eventually come to make up their minds, having waited for years, they want it now. We all do that. This seems the single biggest challenge we face.

Last week I raised another issue around where we might be able to relieve some of the pressure. In reality, there are some very poor houses with draughty windows, draughty doors and faulty roofs. It could be the whole basic construction of the house. Why get a more sophisticated energy saving retrofit when the house is so faulty? It does not matter what someone does in energy saving retrofits until we get the fabric of the whole house right.

There is a grant called the HAOP, that is, housing aid for older people, which is available for roofs, windows and doors or anything you want. The only problem, certainly in Galway, is that the limit of the grant is €8,000. We know how little we can get for €8,000. There is no waiting list for it; it uses local contractors and it does not have to involve people on a special list to do the basic work. What is the view of the witnesses on the idea of increasing funding from the State for this scheme in order that people can get basic work needed on the house done before they get as far as the warmer home scheme? They could work in tandem and the warmer home scheme would be a follow-on in this regard. It would be an integral part but a follow-on to getting the basic structure right.

We could also take the element of older people out of it and have it for people on low incomes because it is means tested. People on low incomes who are under the age of 66 or 65 could access the scheme if they had very poor housing. If you are cold, you are cold. It is not only a problem for older people who are aged over 66. Many people, particularly in rural Ireland but also in urban Ireland, have inherited houses that were in very poor condition. They might have cared for a parent and inherited these houses that are in poor condition. They are of limited means because they gave up their lives to caring. They should be eligible for this type of scheme. We need to be practical about this. Some of the people I am dealing with are so far from heat pumps that they are not the issue. Not needing as much energy as they do would be the first big saving in their lives. If we got that far then we could then get to the warmer home scheme and heat pumps.

Do the witnesses get resistance from older people regarding things such as heat pumps on the basis that it would involve ripping up the house and they do not want to move out? In other words, do they want to do the 80% job and not the 100% job because of disruption to the physical house? They will certainly not leave their own house for anybody.

Ms Averil Power

I thank Deputy Ó Cuív for raising the broader issue of medical card eligibility. It is certainly something on which we have advocated on behalf of all cancer patients. When someone is diagnosed with cancer the patient and often a loved one must stop work or reduce their hours. The research in our report on the real cost of cancer found this can result in an average drop in household income of €1,500 a month or up to €18,000 a year. This is the drop in income for people as a result of a cancer diagnosis. At the same time, they are hit with extra charges for things such as medications, car parking charges at hospitals, travel to appointments and energy costs. All of this that adds up very quickly. While we are here specifically to speak about those in palliative care and cancer patients, end-of-life financial hardship is a massive issue for cancer patients in general. This is certainly something on which we are advocating.

Specifically with regard to what we are putting forward today on behalf of those who have a life-limiting cancer diagnosis, there is no doubt but there is a lot of truth in what Deputy Ó Cuív said about how difficult it is for people to accept the diagnosis. One of the greatest challenges with night nursing is often that we get called in too late. We can provide up to ten nights of care and we will go beyond this when someone needs it but our average is only three and a half nights of care because people often only bring us in at the very end. This is because it can be difficult for people to know they are that close and to accept it. There is no doubt that it is certainly an issue.

With regard to the financial side and the two years, this is what we have worked for and achieved with medical cards. We do find that it works. Because of the sheer tsunami of costs and the massive drop in income, people feel they do not have a choice, whether they like it or not, about getting the letter to qualify for the medical card. We think it would be the same here. Most people would still do their very best to beat the odds. They would state they have to get the letter from the doctor stating they have less than two years to live but they would do their damnedest to beat those odds and make sure the prediction is not a reality.

I welcome Deputy Ó Cuív's insight and expertise not only as a long-serving Deputy working with constituents on these issues but also as a former Minister for Social Protection. The question is how we work around existing schemes. We do advocate for everything to be opened up as much as possible but on this particular issue we are asking how we can have something that is limited and precise, uses existing schemes and definitions, and seems doable from the perspective of the Department. We also have broader asks that we would also like to see delivered for the broader group.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

I have a supplementary question.

An Cathaoirleach

I will bring in Friends of the Earth and then come back.

Ms Clare O'Connor

We fully agree on the issues of skills and labour capacity. There really is not enough and this needs to be tackled quite urgently. There is a more efficient way of rolling out the retrofitting scheme whereby local authorities retrofitting homes in certain areas collaborate directly with the SEAI, which is also retrofitting homes in the same area so that an area-based approach is taken. We propose looking at areas with the highest rates of energy poverty in the country and do a mapping exercise to identify the highest rates of energy poverty and the lowest BERs in order that the local authorities and the SEAI come together to actively target them and prioritise them.

On the issue of people not understanding the scheme or not wanting to get involved, recently we worked with the Irish Green Building Council, which did interesting research on our behalf. We have not published it yet. One thing it found was that even for local authorities that go out to try to sign up people to get their homes retrofitted, there is a bit of hesitancy. Fingal County Council has done this in a really positive way. It went to housing estates that had predominantly social housing and some private homes. It grouped them all together to offer everyone this retrofitting service. It employe a tenant liaison officer. This was very effective in speaking to people and explaining exactly what was happening and being a touch point for them throughout the process, including after they got the heat pump installed. There is confusion around the actual operation of heat pumps. To have one person directly there to hold the hands of people as they go through this is very important to develop the understanding so people know the benefits of it.

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Deputy Ó Cuív made a few points and I thank him very much for the questions. On the issue of labour and the availability of installers, as Ms O'Connor said it is an issue across the board. Part of what we are faced with now is prioritisation and targeting. This is the real issue that we are being faced with and need to deal with. This is relevant when it comes to social authority housing because, as Ms O'Connor said, there is an opportunity to deal with them in some way, shape or form as a block given they are of the same type of housing. It also relates to trust. Trust is very important because, naturally, there might be a lack of trust in certain cases, whether it is with regard to inspections or external people coming in and looking at homes. This is where we need what we spoke about previously with regard to community liaison officers, energy advisers and those working directly on poverty and hardship to provide this advice.

We do not have the numbers to hand but we can revert to the Deputy with statistics on the age groups.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

If we had that information, it would not be to exclude any group but to include it in a different way. There is a suite of measures for over-70s anyway. They get the electricity allowance and so on. Having that information would be helpful.

Over the past week, I have examined the single measures that people can opt for instead of having deep retrofits. They are quite attractive. It means that someone can put in solar panels, insulation or whatever measure they pick. It probably gives a household 80% of what it would get with a deep retrofit with much less expenditure. Maybe we should highlight this approach. It is also much quicker.

I agree with prioritising, but one of the challenges is that those waiting on the warmer homes scheme are waiting on the State. Is there a tendency for those who go private to get priority because they have the money to pay? How do we deal with this challenge?

An Cathaoirleach

Before anyone responds, I will make a point about the labour market challenge. I commend the Irish Prison Service on its initiative to train some of the people who are due for release in these skills. It is a pilot scheme but I hope it can be developed.

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

I understand where Deputy Ó Cuív is coming from, given the unavailability of labour and installers. There are those on schemes while there are those who are willing to pay and, if they have the means, want their measures to be delivered as soon as possible. The problem we are facing is that, generally speaking, all of the onus rests on the individual and the person with greater means is expecting the delivery of these measures, be they solar panels, heat pumps or something else. There is increasing energy poverty, those in social housing are in greatest need and, as we mentioned, those at risk of energy poverty may also face other hardships, for example, disabilities, yet there is no apparatus or system to ensure the roll-out for them as soon as possible.

Part of the reason Friends of the Earth is prioritising this is because, notwithstanding the fact that, as the Deputy rightly pointed out, the expense of a full retrofit with a heat pump is substantial, this is where everything is going over the next decade. In ten years’ time, solar panels and heat pumps will be extremely common. The price is only going one way. However, there is a major risk that those in energy poverty or at risk of it will be locked out of this transition.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Mac Evilly.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

May I say just one thing?

An Cathaoirleach

No. I will bring the Deputy back in if we have time at the end, but I want to get other members in. Senator Wall has indicated.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh took the Chair.

Senator Mark Wall

I welcome our guests. Unfortunately, but also thankfully, my family has had to use the night nursing service twice. I wish to put on the record the great job that night nurses and the Irish Cancer Society do. It is important to acknowledge that work. The harrowing stories the witnesses have told us about families with that experience brought it back home to me.

A major issue, and one that has only been raised with me in the past couple of weeks, is that of bridging finance, which I believe was mentioned earlier. I have encountered three cases in the past two weeks involving Government grants. One is the housing aid grant that Deputy Ó Cuív and I have raised numerous times at this committee. People are not able to afford the bridging finance that is needed to improve their houses through retrofits. The Croí Cónaithe grant is another example. People have been approved by Kildare County Council in the area I live, but when they approach their local credit unions, they cannot get bridging finance because there was a cancer diagnosis. I would welcome a response. This issue needs to be addressed because these people are living in energy poverty and cannot upgrade or retrofit their homes, leaving them in a difficult position. I will not hold up the meeting. I again thank the night nurses and wish to put the issue of bridging finance on the record. Given the three cases I have dealt with within the past two weeks, it is a serious problem.

The Government has had a report on improving the housing adaptation grant for almost two years now. I have been following this matter. The report is with the Department and I hope we will get some answers at our next session. The approach needs to be changed. As Deputy Ó Cuív stated, €8,000 is simply not good enough in the current environment. In fairness, the housing adaptation grant can be as much as €30,000.

The building costs I am experiencing in Kildare for simple adaptations are up to €70,000. Where are these families who are struggling to get the extra €30,000 or €40,000? I ask the witnesses to comment on the bridging finance that is so badly needed.

Ms Averil Power

When people are diagnosed with cancer, there is a massive income hit and they are also hit with extra costs at the same time. Senator Wall is correct that they just do not have the income to be able to bridge that gap. It is an issue we are aware of and we appreciate the Senator raising it.

I am conscious of the Chair's statement that the committee will make recommendations arising from this meeting. We can follow up on the specific figures Deputy Ó Cuív raised. Ms Drynan-Gale is correct that the vast majority of cancer patients are older; it is primarily a disease of older people. Regarding this issue in particular, we have concern about the hardship for those in younger groups. When people who are diagnosed with cancer at a younger age, often the income drop is greater because they would ordinarily be in employment and not retired. They are likely to be in the midst of their mortgage period or paying rent, so they have those costs and they may have childcare costs.

With childhood cancer, the income hit for parents from taking time off to look after the child and having to pay for additional childcare for other children while they are travelling to Crumlin hospital with the child who is sick is a massive issue. We will send the committee the figures showing show that while those who die from cancer are primarily older people, the hardship is often greater for those caring for a child who is ill or those who are diagnosed with cancer in a younger age group where they would ordinarily have a higher income and many other household costs before they are hit with all the additional costs of cancer. We urge the committee to look behind the statistics because that is a particular group that we feel needs help. They do not get access over-70 schemes and all the other benefits available to older people. That is why we are arguing it should be universal.

Ms Clare O'Connor

We welcome the Senator’s comments on the finance issue and the fact that most people cannot afford the other half of the cost that the grant provided does not cover. Mr. MacEvilly mentioned our partnership with Bohemians Football Club, which was a community engagement piece looking at how communities can co-create solutions for retrofitting at a local level. This brought together the SEAI and Codema, which is Dublin’s energy agency, and a credit union came along as well. The credit union was very willing and enthusiastic about coming up with creative solutions for this issue of bridging finance. It looked at forming a common bond specifically for members of this football club, leading to greenhouse loans and so on. I note the Government has introduced low-cost loans but expanding that to the credit unions would be a positive step forward. Low-cost loans will work for some people but there are still many people who cannot access credit for loads of reasons and it is important that is noted. Looking at other EU countries, it is either the Netherlands or Germany that has introduced a zero-interest loan for people who are on low incomes, which I think would be a much better solution for people who cannot access low-interest loans.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I think Irish Rural Link pointed out last week that the credit unions may be locked out of that low interest rate loan scheme. That could be addressed.

Does Senator Wall have any follow-up questions?

Senator Mark Wall

No. I thank Ms O’Connor for coming back in because I think the credit unions can play a massive role here. I understand the committee will pursue that matter.

Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh

I thank the Leas-Cathaoirleach for letting me contribute even though I am not a permanent member of this committee. I have been listening online to the contributions and statements this morning. Last week, I raised the issue of warmer homes. I note the witnesses have a meeting with the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, and I wish them well with it. The Minister needs to come up with better answers than he has given me to date. All I get is that spending has increased from €40 million to €210 million. It seems like the more money that goes in, the less affordable it is for people who desperately need it.

I will raise palliative care. One cannot really suggest that, as Deputy Ó Cuív said, constituents will come into our offices and we will ask them to give us something in writing to guarantee they will not live any more than two years. Is that where we are when we have an €8 billion budget surplus? That needs to be brought home to the Minister, Deputy Ryan. We cannot do that and we would refuse do it on ethical grounds anyway. We can ask here today whether any of us can guarantee we will be alive tomorrow. We cannot guarantee that. Why then are we excluding people who are in palliative care? That is what we are doing in respect of the warmer homes scheme.

According to the SEAI, a pre-works BER takes eight to ten months from application; a survey takes approximately 14 months from application; works are completed in approximately 24 to 26 months; and a post-works BER takes approximately two to three months after the works are completed. That is crazy. We are spending all that money and we cannot look after the most vulnerable. I know the witnesses know that. I acknowledge and thank them for the work they do on this. We would not have an opportunity to talk about it this morning if they were not here. We have to find another way around it and it the Minister who has to find it. If the SEAI will not prioritise people in the warmer homes scheme, surely it should be enough to just say that somebody is in palliative care without going into their intimate personal details. Hopefully, people will come out of palliative care and will have better outcomes. We hope all of the time that people will have better outcomes. Surely, that should be sufficient. We need to put it to the Minister, Deputy Ryan, that if somebody says they are in palliative care, they should surely be eligible for funding.

If the Department is not going to make these people eligible for funding for insulation works and other works they need – they are not looking for deep retrofits in the main, as Deputy Ó Cuív said – the local authorities should be made responsible for this. Let housing aid for older people or housing aid for people with disabilities come under the local authorities. Let us not have all of these most vulnerable trapped in the middle of these schemes while the Government pats itself on the back for it. In all honesty, as public representatives, we cannot do what we are being asked to do and I would not expect the witnesses to advocate that we do it either.

Is there anything else the witnesses wish to say on the warmer homes scheme or whether it could be transferred to local government? In the other scheme – the better energy scheme – there is a funding gap that people are expected to bridge. Is there another means by which that money can be paid so that the warmer homes scheme achieves an outcome but it is done quicker? It seems that if you have money, you can have it done quicker. Is there anything more the witnesses wish to say? I wish to also ask about medical cards and transport.

Deputy Denis Naughten resumed the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

We will take the questions together because we are under time constraints.

Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh

Okay. Transport is a huge issue for cancer patients in rural areas. The services have been centralised and there are some very good results, which I acknowledge. However, when people have a 60-mile round trip to get to Galway from, say, Belmullet, the affordability and availability of transport are a real barrier, one which is creating an awful lot of stress for people who could do without extra stress in their lives because of transport.

I heard what was said on medical cards. Has any costing been done on the automatic entitlement to the medical card so that we know specifically what we are asking for? I agree with Deputy Ó Cuív on the thresholds. It is crazy trying to get people to fit into thresholds that were set 11 years ago.

Ms Averil Power

I will start with the transport issue. As I said earlier, it is an issue people with cancer and their families often raise with us. There is no doubt that the centralisation of cancer services, and surgeries in particular, has had a positive impact on survival and the quality of care people receive in the centres of excellence, but it means travelling long distances.

There is a travel to care grant from Government, which we administer, but the amounts given out are small and restricted. We have raised the point that we would like to see the amounts available from that grant increased, particularly for those-----

Senator Rose Conway-Walsh

How much are they?

Ms Averil Power

An Cathaoirleach

Before we finish, I have a couple of very brief questions for the Irish Cancer Society. They may be more relevant to Dr. Denieffe than to the society itself. In the work she has done, has she looked at the impact of rental homes as opposed to owner-occupied homes? Was that differential looked at? It is clear from all of the evidence we have got that there is a particular problem as regards the rental sector. On the analysis and study Dr. Denieffe has done, we all know that people who are ill feel the cold more. That is a fact of life. The warmer homes scheme has acknowledged that through the eligibility of domiciliary care allowance recipients. It is the only non-means tested scheme to be part of the warmer homes scheme for that very reason. There is already an acknowledgement there in that regard. However, we also know that living in a cold home has an impact on people's health and health outcomes. Based on Dr. Denieffe's study, have there been delayed diagnoses in households that are in fuel poverty, perhaps because they cannot afford to go to a GP to get a diagnosis in the first place? Do we have any indication of this issue having an impact on the final outcome of such diagnoses as regards terminal illness? Anecdotally, that would seem to be the case. Has the research reflected that?

I have some very brief questions for our other witnesses. I am sorry, I will need one second. My head is a fright. The questions are for Friends of the Earth and Ms O'Connor. A clear set of recommendations was laid out in their presentation. We really welcome that. One of the things that is clear from today's evidence is that all of the responsibility lies with the individual. There have only been two schemes where that was not the case. One was the just transition scheme in the midland counties, where private housing was targeted as well as local authority housing. The other was the warmth and well-being scheme. In the main, it was the public health nurses going into houses who identified the recipients. The scheme was able to bridge that gap. I hope the Minister will publish the results of the scheme next month, which we would all welcome. Is there an opportunity to take a project like the warmth and well-being scheme or the retrofit scheme in the midlands from pilot scale and to ramp it up? Perhaps the Irish Cancer Society could answer first, followed by Friends of the Earth.

Dr. Suzanne Denieffe

I thank the Cathaoirleach for those questions. On his question as to whether we explored rental homes and any specific energy issues associated with such homes, we did not. We asked nurses about the types of homes provided but we did not specifically ask whether they were owner-occupied or rented. We also did not ask about delayed diagnoses but one of the things we did ask was whether nurses felt that living in cold homes had an impact on people's physical health. Some 14% of nurses responded that they felt, where people were living in a cold home, that cold home had hastened those people's death. That finding is supported by international evidence. We did a scoping review on the impacts of people living in cold homes and there is a relationship between cold homes and hastened death.

Ms Averil Power

On delayed diagnoses, there are very significant inequities in that area. We have not looked at it specifically in the context of energy but we funded a report from TASC into inequities in cancer care last year.

We know that stage of diagnosis can be the difference between life and death with cancer. The earlier it is picked up, the easier it is to treat and the likelier someone is to survive and if he or she survives as a result of less harsh treatment, he or she is more likely to have a better quality of life. Research has shown very strongly that income has a massive influence on the stage at which someone will be diagnosed in this country. Previous research found that someone was three times more likely to get and die from cancer in Mulhuddart than in Castleknock, two areas that are side by side. That is just a snapshot from that area but this would be replicated around the country because of the specific challenge in Ireland around getting access to diagnostics. Once someone gets a cancer diagnosis, treatment is for the most part equal. People will get there. Some differences exist regarding some of the health insurers reimbursing some of the more expensive drugs that someone would not get through the public system but for the most part, treatment is equal when someone gets that diagnosis. People from poorer backgrounds are getting that diagnosis much later because they cannot jump the public waiting lists. They cannot afford to pay for private tests so they hear those words, "You've got cancer", at a later stage, often in emergency departments. One in four cancer diagnoses is picked up in emergency departments often from people in excruciating pain with advanced cancers that could have been detected earlier so we would say it is a massive issue. It is not something that was specifically part of the remit of this research but is something we have funded research into separately. Diagnostics and picking cancers up earlier in everybody constitute the most significant issue with cancer in Ireland.

Ms Anna Drynan-Gale

I concur with Dr. Denieffe that a cold home and being in a cold environment have a very detrimental effect, exacerbate a patient's other co-morbidities and make him or her very unwell. What Deputy Ó Cuív said earlier resonated with me. He described homes I have been in with dying patients. That is the cold stark reality of it. Patients are dying in cold homes. This is what Dr. Denieffe's study has shown empirically. The ask of the Government involves how we are going to address that and the elephant that is often in the room, which is the luxury of time. These patients do not have that. They do not have the opportunity to wait for lengthy application or approval processes. They do not have that time.

Ms Clare O'Connor

I will comment on rental properties versus owner-occupied properties. There are really stark comments from the ICS about how important it is that we bring rental properties up to standard. We really need to see minimum BERs from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage so we ask that the committee raises that with the Department when it appears before the committee.

I thank the witnesses for their evidence this morning. I apologise for curtailing the debate; we could have gone on much longer. The committee remains open to any other suggestions or ideas they have.

Sitting suspended at 11.06 a.m. and resumed at 11.10 a.m.

An Cathaoirleach

From the Department of housing, I welcome Ms Áine Stapleton, assistant secretary general for social housing delivery, Mr. Seán Armstrong, senior adviser in the climate and construction unit, and Mr. Noel Halvey, assistant principal officer. From the Department of Social Protection, I welcome Mr. Rónán Hession, assistant secretary general for working age and family policy, Mr. Simon Shevlin, principal officer, supplementary welfare allowance, and Ms Helen Kilcullen, assistant principal officer, supplementary welfare allowance policy.

I invite Ms Stapleton to make her opening statement.

Ms Áine Stapleton

I thank the committee for the invitation to discuss the important subject of energy poverty. As the Chair mentioned, I am joined by my colleagues from the Department Seán Armstrong and Noel Halvey.

The management and maintenance of the local authority housing stock is an important matter for the Department and the sector. There are over 146,000 local authority-owned social housing properties in the State, which have an estimated market value of €25 billion. Of equal importance is the requirement that the local authority tenants who occupy those properties and pay their weekly rents be living in homes that provide good comfort levels for those households.

In accordance with section 58 of the Housing Act 1966, local authorities are legally responsible for the management and maintenance of their housing stock including pre-letting repairs to vacant properties, the implementation of a planned maintenance programme and carrying out of responsive repairs. As the committee will be aware, local authorities also have a legal obligation to ensure all their tenanted properties are compliant with the provisions of the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2019.

Notwithstanding the legal obligation on local authorities to manage and maintain their own stock, annual funding support is provided from the Department for management and maintenance under a number of funding programmes. In total, since 2013 to the end of 2023, under the voids programme, the energy efficiency programme, including the midlands pilot, and the disabled person grant scheme, some €819 million of Exchequer funding was recouped to the local authorities to support this range of work.

Housing for All outlines the ambition for driving environmental sustainability in our local authority housing stock. The Department continues to support local authorities to move away from maintaining homes through voids and vacancy to a more strategic and informed approach underpinned by stock condition surveys and by the Department's work with the Local Government Management Agency, LGMA, and the local authority sector on implementing an asset-based ICT system. The Minister has secured year-on-year increased funding to local authorities as part of the programme for Government's commitment, led by the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, that calls for the retrofitting of 500,000 homes to B2, or cost-optimal equivalent, BER standard by 2030, of which approximately 36,500 are expected to be local authority-owned homes. We are on track to achieve this.

The strong emphasis on fuel poverty and the need to improve thermal performance in the housing stock remains a priority for the Department and led to the implementation of a newly revised programme in 2021. This new holistic energy efficiency retrofit programme provides for an efficiency-first approach, meaning fabric measures and efficient renewable heat pump systems are supported to achieve a BER B2 or cost-optimal level. Fossil fuel boilers are not supported by the energy efficiency retrofit programme. In addition, all new dwellings are constructed to A2 building energy rating and fossil fuel boilers have effectively been phased out.

As a result of the advanced performance requirements of building regulations, it is estimated approximately 40,000 local authority dwellings have been constructed to a typical A or B rating since 2008. Taking account of new housing delivery by local authorities and the energy efficiency retrofit programme, it is expected approximately 70% of our local authority housing stock will have a BER of A or B by 2030. Budget 2024 has again provided an uplift in funding for this retrofit programme, with €90 million of Exchequer funding available to the sector.

We are happy to address any questions members may have.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Stapleton. I now invite Mr. Hession to make his opening statement.

Mr. Rónán Hession

I thank the committee for the invitation to discuss energy poverty, specifically in reference to the retrofitting of homes and the suitability of fuel allowance to meet the needs of people in both urban and rural areas. I am the assistant secretary general in the Department of Social Protection with responsibility for working age income supports, including the fuel allowance scheme. I am joined by Simon Shevlin, principal officer in the area, and Helen Kilcullen, assistant principal officer.

The Government published its energy poverty action plan in December 2022. Although led by the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, it is a whole-of-government plan that involves key actions for our Department, including through targeted social welfare income supports. In the plan, energy poverty is defined as an inability to heat or power a home adequately. In Ireland, energy poverty is currently measured using an expenditure-based method, where a household is considered to be in energy poverty if it is spending more than 10% of its income on energy. The actions in the plan fall into two overarching categories, namely, near term, where income supports have an important role to play, and medium term, with the focus on using deeper energy efficiency upgrades to help tackle the root causes of energy poverty and ensure an inclusive and just transition to a carbon-neutral society.

In terms of income supports, the fuel allowance is a means-tested scheme that assists pensioners and other welfare-dependent householders with meeting the cost of their heating needs during the winter season. The scheme is long-standing within the social welfare system and has evolved over many years. The allowance represents a contribution towards a person's normal heating expenses but is not intended to meet those costs in full. The allowance is €33 per week and is added to a person’s primary payment during the 28 weeks of the fuel season, which this year runs from 25 September 2023 to 5 April 2024. There has been a significant increase in the cost of the scheme, which has more than doubled in the past five years and now stands at more than €500 million. Separately, we have provided a briefing to the committee on the expenditure over the past five years.

Turning to the main qualifying conditions, only one fuel allowance is paid to a household. For those under 70, it is payable to those who are in receipt of a long-term social welfare payment, satisfy a means test and are either living alone or satisfy the scheme’s household composition rule. A person aged 70 or over does not need to be in receipt of a social welfare payment to apply for the fuel allowance. The option to receive the allowance in two lump sums was introduced in the 2017-18 fuel season. As of December 2023, some 26% of customers had opted for payment via lump sum.

There have been a number of important changes to the fuel allowance in recent budgets. In budget 2023, the Minister announced the largest ever expansion of the fuel allowance scheme. In January 2023, a new means threshold was introduced for people aged 70 years and over, of €500 for a single person and €1,000 for a couple. In addition, for people aged 70 or over, the level of capital that is disregarded was increased from €20,000 to €50,000. Savings over €50,000 are assessed on a proportionate basis only. The weekly means threshold for those aged under 70 was increased by €80 to €200 above the appropriate rate of the contributory State pension. Also from January 2023, the disablement benefit and the half-rate carer's allowance payment are disregarded when assessing means for fuel allowance purposes. The disablement benefit also no longer disbars a household from receiving the fuel allowance payment. As part of budget 2024, an additional payment of €300 for fuel allowance recipients was paid in November 2023.

The household benefits package comprises the electricity or gas allowance and the free television licence. The gas or electricity element is paid at a rate of €35 per month for 12 months of the year, with one benefit paid per household.

Last year, the weekly means threshold for those aged under 70 was increased from €120 to €200 above the appropriate rate of State pension contributory.

Under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, a heating supplement may be paid in certain circumstances to assist people with special heating needs, for example, due to ill health, infirmity or a medical condition. At the end of December 2023, there were 950 people in receipt of this supplement.

The Department may also provide additional needs payments to help meet necessary expenses that a person cannot pay from their weekly income. Over 5,800 payments were made at a total cost of over €3 million to assist with the payment of household bills and heating costs in 2023.

Finally, a fuel supplement may be paid in lieu of fuel allowance. This is most commonly used where a person has been in receipt of a qualifying long-term Department of Social Protection payment and moves temporarily to a non-qualifying short-term payment. There were 118 recipients of the fuel supplement on 31 December 2023.

Turning to the Department of housing, my constituency is an urban one and has a very large volume of social housing stock. A lot of good work has been done by Cork city and county councils over the past couple of years, but there is still a huge amount of work remaining and I am sure it is the case in all the major urban centres, especially. An awful lot of local authority housing is still in very poor condition. An awful lot of it is old, having been built in the 1940s and 1950s, and is challenging to retrofit. An issue that has been raised with me by contractors in particular is the money available through the local authorities is not as attractive as it was a couple of years ago. This is partly because there is more work, but partly because the amount being provided by the Departments through the local authorities is not keeping pace with construction inflation. Consequently, an awful lot of what is happening is work on the local authority apartment blocks where it is probably easier to achieve economies of scale. Work is not happening to the same extent as it was with the houses, many of which were, as I said, built in the 1940s and 1950s. Is the Department actively reviewing the amount being provided to local authorities, because it seems to have slowed to some extent?

I have something else to flag. It is a small bit parochial but I would be neglecting my duties otherwise and I am sure this is an issue in other areas. There is particular type of local authority flat that exists in Cork and may exist also in Dublin, which has a very substantial balcony at the stairwell that is really challenging to retrofit. The flats at Noonan's Road are probably the best-known example and have been the source of discussion. The chief executive of Cork City Council visited and said she could hardly believe the cold and damp conditions there. It is a priority for regeneration at the minute, but there are other examples of that model across the city in Togher, Ballymacthomas, off Shandon Street and Wolfe Tone Street, Cherry Tree Road and different places like that. This model might exist in other places. Is this an issue the Department is aware of? An awful lot of the straight-line apartment blocks, which are the lower-hanging fruit, have been addressed and some good work has been done. However, the model I have referred to seems to be very hard to retrofit because the surface are is big, there are a lot of big openings and there is this wide stairwell.

From a local authority point of view, a lot of housing stock, though very well-built at the time, has had time take a toll on it. Local authority houses built between the 1940s and 1960s are often cold and damp. In Dublin they are in places like Crumlin, Drimnagh, Kimmage and Ballyfermot. In Cork they are in places like Mount Sion Road, Greenmount and Ballyphehane. There might be a street of 50 houses and there might be 20 local authority houses left. They will be in twos and threes and that kind of stuff, but the rest will have been bought over the past 60 or 70 years. All the housing stock is probably in need of retrofitting, but only a percentage is the responsibility of the Department. Complicated though it may be, there may be an opportunity to marry the interests of the private owners and maybe some small number of landlords as well and those of the residents of the local authority stock, which is reduced but still very substantial in these areas. Is the way to achieve those economies of scale something the Department has considered? The windows and doors of an awful lot of these houses might have been done, but the walls and the roofs are still leaking a lot of heat and letting in damp as well. That is the height of it.

Ms Áine Stapleton

On the issue of cost inflation, the average amount we have been devoting to the retrofit programme has broadly increased in line with inflation, which has been approximately 20% over the past few years. We are aware that sometimes there are other enhancements local authorities wish to make. We are trying to balance getting the maximum effectiveness from the envelope of money we have with perhaps a desire sometimes to do a little bit more. The local authorities can if they wish contribute some of their own resources if there is a particular issue they feel would be useful to take the opportunity to do as part of a retrofit programme. They engage with us around these issues, so we will continue to engage with them around some of the challenges they feel are there on the cost, but we have overall been increasing the average costs.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

Just to supplement that, Ms Stapleton mentioned meeting the cost of inflation. Construction inflation has risen way above other inflation, especially the cost of timber. Has the Department taken into account increased construction inflation in particular?

Ms Áine Stapleton

We have our own assessment from the wider social housing building programme and over the past three years construction inflation is probably 23%. Our average award under the retrofit programme has gone up of the order of 20%, so we are more or less keeping line in with what we regard as construction inflation.

On the issue of bundling, we agree with the Deputy that there are efficiencies if we can get local authority and private stock looked at when they are co-located. There are challenges around that in terms of the willingness of the private householders to participate, the particular timing of what we might be doing and the funding issues. There is a pilot ongoing that Fingal County Council is leading that looks at this issue of bundling and trying to mix the council's retrofit programme with some private housing stock. We hope to get a report from the council quite shortly on the challenges that have arisen from that and how the authority thinks that might inform a broader approach. It is very challenging, but we can certainly see the merit of trying to do something along those lines. I do not disagree at all.

I might to turn to my colleague, Mr. Halvey, on the question of the models the Deputy mentioned in Cork and the design issues with the balconies. I am not familiar, but I would like to check whether he has come across these.

Mr. Eoghan Halvey

On the point about the different typology of stock, I commend Cork City Council on this because it is one of the lead authorities on the asset management-based ICT system and its ambition is impressive in that regard. As to the design of the apartments, the retrofit scheme is more centred around housing stock and maybe not apartments, but there is work ongoing. I have been aware of the programme the Deputy mentioned in Cork that went into the regeneration and I dealt with the council on that one. It was initially looked at for energy retrofit works in the first instance.

We are doing work with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and communicating with them and with other colleagues and agencies through the Housing Agency on publishing a report that will, once and for all, identify how we tackle the apartment complex situation, as an apartment build in its entirety rather than on an individual unit-by-unit basis within an apartment.

Mr. Rónán Hession

I thank the Deputy for the question. I thank the Deputy for his comments on Liam Daly. I will pass them on to him. Mr. Daly will be glad to know that the person felt well looked after.

I have just asked my colleague to check the figures that were queried. I am happy to follow up the point with the SEAI. It is my understanding that while invalidity pension is not a qualifying scheme for the warmer homes scheme, the fuel allowance is. Invalidity pension is a qualifying scheme for fuel allowance. There are approximately 16,000 people with the invalidity pension who are in receipt of the fuel allowance. I am not overly familiar with the warmer homes scheme but I would have thought that if those 16,000 people are getting fuel allowance, they would get in. On the balance, off the top of my head I believe the figure for invalidity pension is about 70,000, so it is a subset of those. We are happy to clarify that for the committee. Maybe that cohort might transfer across.

On the Irish Cancer Society, I do not know if this issue has been raised prior to the recent report on the household benefits package or whether this is in the context of pre-budget. The household benefits package is a secondary payment where it is a top up where there is an underlying qualifying payment. Certainly if people with cancer are on a disability allowance or invalidity pension, since about 2018 - which is when we first started tagging schemes by the actual underlying condition - there are approximately 5,000 people with cancer and who have disability allowance have come onto those schemes and some 15,000 who are on the invalidity pension. That is around 20,000 people who are on those schemes who have the household benefits package but it is not an automatic entitlement. That is the long and short of it. The underlying qualifying schemes are intended to try to capture those with long-term illnesses or disabilities.

I have just been advised that the figures for the invalidity pension are 56,000, which means that around 40,000 of those must not be on a fuel allowance, probably because of the household composition rule around people who are also living in the house.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Hession. Does Deputy Ó Laoghaire have a supplementary question?

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I do not. Perhaps the information on the pilot in Fingal could be forwarded to the committee. I would be very interested in that whenever it is completed. It would be very interesting.

An Cathaoirleach

The learnings from the midlands retrofit programme would also be interesting to see.

Senator Mark Wall

I welcome our guests today. I have a number of questions and I will start with the fuel allowance. In the past week I have come across the case of a means-tested fuel allowance for those over the age of 70. The problem is that the person is assessed on gross income. I am told this is correct and is in Article 8 of Part 1 of SI 142 of 2007, which I received from some very helpful people in the widows' pension section. Unfortunately, that person is paying tax on the bit of a private pension they have. If the net income was taken into account then the person would be under the fuel allowance rates. The problem is that this person is living in a very old house and does not qualify for the warmer homes scheme. Will Mr. Hession clarify if that situation of gross versus net income can be looked at again? That person does not qualify because of being just over the limit, which in this case is actually just €20 over the limit but the person would be under the limit if the assessment was on net income rather than a gross assessment.

My other question on the fuel allowance was mentioned earlier in the context of the household composition rule. I have raised this before. I have come across a number of cases, and I am sure the Chair has too, where there is another person on a social welfare payment in the house which disqualifies the person applying from getting a fuel allowance. There are a number of issues relating to this. First, the person is providing a roof over the other person's head and normally this is a son or daughter. If this person was not living in the house then it would be up to the local authority to try to house that person. I believe it is wrong to use the household composition rule to disqualify that person from a fuel allowance. I would love our guests today to comment on that and the reasons for it. As I have said continuously, that person has to be housed and the first person is providing a roof over their son's or daughter's head. I have raised this point at every meeting we have had and the Chair has heard me. I want to get a comment from the Department's housing section as to where we are with the review of the housing aid grant and the action plan. I am told it is with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. I am told that the report has been prepared for at least one year now. I raised this in previous conversations about bridging finance. I have come across three cases this week. In one case a lady has been in hospital for at least five months and she has come home. Thankfully she got the go-ahead for a grant from Kildare County Council but they have offered her an amount which is just short of €30,000, as that is what she qualifies for. The cheapest quote she can get to do the work is for €60,000. This lady needs that work to adapt her house to allow her to continue to live in her house. If she does not get this she is going back to hospital again, and obviously at a much more considerable cost to the State and to her family who want her to live at home. Where is the report and are we going to see changes in the housing adaption grant, the housing aid grant, and the €30,000 rule, which are simply not working given the severe increases in building costs and so on? With the whole area of bridging finance is there somewhere in the Department of Social Protection or the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage that could look at bridging finance?

One of the areas I also wish to raise again is the whole community welfare officer service. I will put on record again the great help we all get from our community welfare officers. It is, however, challenging at times to actually look for that bridging finance from the community welfare officers because sometimes what is needed can be up to €30,000. Are there rules within that particular supplementary welfare service that allow for this bridging finance to be provided by community welfare officers? Is there a limit to the amount that can be provided? I would love to get an answer on that.

With regard to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, I have come across a lot of cases in my county - and indeed other countries since other councillors have been on to me as well - where air-to-water systems have been put into a house where there has been no upgrade of insulation, windows or doors. That is simply not working. Is there a policy within the Department of housing that there should be an overall package or are we going to continue to allow local authorities to put in 30% or 40% of the overall need of the house? We should ensure the house is wrapped and done properly in the first place. I would much appreciate answers to those questions.

Mr. Rónán Hession

I thank the Senator for the questions. The means tests are all done on gross income in our system. The only exception is the working family payment. The reason for this has been discussed in this room previously when it came up in the context of carers. The reality around net assessment is that people will all have different tax arrangements, there will be different levels of outgoings, and it is extremely difficult to get fair and consistent results. These assessments, therefore, are done on a gross basis. The disregards are also at a level that reflect this. For example, if we had a net system we would not necessarily have disregards of €500 and €1,000 . There is a sort of trade-off. When we are dealing across a scheme that has more than 400,000 recipients, one system might benefit one cohort and another system might benefit a different cohort. Reference was made to SI 142 of 2007, which contains our main payments regulations. Across the social welfare system we do our means testing on a gross basis because it is something we can see, we can get it from the Revenue system, and it is something we can apply fairly before we see whatever other deductions a person might have. Depending on other factors also, the tax ranges might change for a couple.

The household composition rule is technical. Basically the way it works is if there is another adult in the household - outside of being a partner - and if the scheme they are on would itself be a qualifying scheme for fuel allowance, then the person is fine in terms of the household composition rule. If, however, it is another type of scheme then it is not. The Senator's point is a wider housing supply issue. To some extent that is addressed in the exemptions for the accommodation recognition payment, ARP, the payment for Ukrainian refugees, the rent a room scheme and so on. Under the household composition rule, the other person must be on one of the underlying qualifying payments. That is on the basis that the person would have the fuel allowance in their own right so why would one block the household getting it?

We are not in the bridging finance space. Some 35% of all the additional needs payments we provide in the system are housing related. They tend to be for kit-outs for local authority housing.

Regarding bridging finance, the CWO is there to address people's urgent needs that they cannot meet from their own resources. It would be through the levers of housing policy or energy policy that other grants and financial supports would be provided to help people.

Ms Áine Stapleton

I thank the Senator for raising those issues. The review of private housing grants has been concluded by the Department and is currently the subject of engagement with colleagues in the Department of public expenditure and reform in terms of recommendations. We hope to have an outcome shortly.

Regarding what I might term a piecemeal approach, we are aiming for an holistic approach under the retrofit programme whereby a local authority’s work would include the fabric of the building and the heating system. I might ask my colleague, Mr. Halvey, to expand on that a little, but it is in line with what the Senator outlined, in that the work is looked at in its totality.

Mr. Noel Halvey

The programme was revised in 2021 and provides an holistic approach. It is not about putting heat pumps into homes that are inefficient or picking a selection of measures. Rather, it was devised in a way so that the fabric of the home would be upgraded and an energy efficient heating system would be provided. Working with obligated parties, consultants and so forth, local authorities are encouraged to arrive at the measures that suit the individual dwelling to ensure that, at the end of the works, the system is efficient for the tenant or homeowner.

An Cathaoirleach

Does Senator Wall have a supplementary question?

Senator Mark Wall

I have one for Mr. Halvey. Where there is an air-to-water heat pump but the other works have not been carried out, will they be prioritised? These projects are building up because air-to-water heat pumps simply do not work if a house does not have the total system. Following the reviews being carried out by the Department, will we concentrate on those houses that need a full wraparound service more than others or will we start on other houses regardless? Unless the houses have full wraparound services, air-to-water heat pumps are not fit for purpose.

Mr. Noel Halvey

We work off the guidance of the SEAI. As a Department, we do not support or fund a heat pump-only measure. A building has to have the required heat loss indicator, HLI, to have a heat pump installed. I deal with these grants regularly, and I have not seen first hand a heat pump alone being claimed for by a local authority. If there are such examples, though, we can take them away with us and examine them, but the programme takes a fabric approach to the home – external wall and attic insulation, windows and doors if necessary and then the heat pump, providing that the HLI meets the requirement for a heat pump to be installed.

An Cathaoirleach

Perhaps the Senator might provide the Department with the details of the properties in question offline to see if we can-----

Senator Mark Wall

I will indeed. I appreciate that.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

I will start with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. I was fascinated to hear its representatives say there was 20% building inflation. I do not dispute that, but they might tell me how long ago it was that the €8,000 limit – that is certainly the limit in Galway – on the HAOP was set. Is the Department providing a 20% increase in funding for the HAOP every year? For many people, the HAOP is their first go at making the house solid – doing the doors, the windows, the faulty roofs and the other basic construction work – before getting down to work like insulating, installing heat pumps and so on. It is a quick scheme. Local authorities can respond quickly whereas it takes two years just to get an examination under the warmer homes scheme.

Let us concentrate on the HAOP for a minute. Many under-65s are in poor houses but are excluded from the HAOP. There is nowhere for them to go. Some of their houses are inherited and perhaps three generations old. In the countryside particularly, most people own their houses but there is a fair stock of substandard ones. Some of these people cared for elderly people all their lives and have minimal incomes. There is a means test, so the well-to-do cannot benefit. I would be interested in getting information on the cost per unit of a retrofit of a local authority house so that we could have some measure of how little can be done through the HAOP grant, which is the private householder’s first port of call, compared to what a full retrofit would cost the State. That might be a useful figure for fighting with the Minister for public expenditure.

It means I will go a little off beam, but I have another question. What arrangements are being made to make charging points available for residents of local authority estates, some of whom have driveways where they can park their cars while others do not? Charging points are a big money saver and energy saver and would encourage the use of electric cars in future.

Given that it will take the Department years to get through all of the retrofits, what is the policy on getting ahead of that and putting solar panels on local authority houses to cut their energy costs and save on their energy usage?

The Department of Social Protection expanded the fuel allowance in 2023. Its representatives might give us the exact figures, but the cost of relaxing the means test was slightly less than estimated by the end of the year. How much extra did it cost and how many additional recipients joined the free fuel scheme by virtue of the changes that were made? I ask this question because we are putting an idea to the Minister and she is favourably disposed towards it. The committee has been proposing this idea since we were formed. Instead of there being a cliff edge if someone is even €1 over the limit, there should be a half rate or a slide-off rate. We would not have people coming to us who were not getting a fuel allowance because they were €2 or €5 over, leaving them worse off than someone who was just €10 under. That is always a difference. The Minister expressed an interest in the idea. Could the Department give us a costing for a 50% rate if someone was €100 over the means threshold?

It was mentioned that the Department of Social Protection assesses savings at a proportionate rate. Its representatives might tell us what that rate is and how it works. If someone has savings, how quickly should he or she be writing them off? I would be interested in knowing what the Department views as proportionate.

I am not finished. I will go through them fast but I have many questions.

Will Mr. Hession give us a costing? Let us arbitrarily take the next 100 on all the levels and a 50% rate. Can he get us a costing on that?

Mr. Rónán Hession

We can do a costing on that. I will say that the approach taken two budgets ago was quite a big step in the means threshold. In other words, what would be the means threshold where they are? To provide a lower rate of payment above that was to move it out quite considerably. There are different trade offs, but we can certainly do a costing or an estimate. We never really know who is just beyond the threshold because we do not deal with them, but we will do our best and use that.

I will also give the Deputy a note on the means test for household benefits for those between 66 and 70. I have the bones of an attempted answer here, but I would rather give something accurate because it depends on whether or not the person and qualified adults are receiving a pension. I think it is better we give a definitive note setting out the position.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

Am I right that there is no means test if you are getting a State pension and you only have a dependant, or the two are getting State pensions?

Mr. Rónán Hession

Let me check that.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

It was read out the other way.

An Cathaoirleach

That is the case, but anyway we will get the note.

Mr. Rónán Hession

If they are both getting pensions, that is the case but I will clarify that. I do not know that scheme that well and I do not want to improvise.

The Deputy asked about the €35 per month for gas and electricity. We will have a look at it. I think there are indexes around energy prices. I think that rate was struck in 2013, which makes it ten years old now. While there have been changes to other underlying rates in the meantime, the fuel allowance has not changed. We will see if we can use whatever is the index of energy prices to give a sense of the purchasing power these days.

At 950, the numbers for the heating supplement are low but they have never been high for that scheme. Given that we have other schemes in play, it is really used for people who are at the SWA level of income or supports. It is the safety level of support within the social welfare system. Where people have additional health needs, a disability or an infirmity, they will get a supplement. The figures range from €2.50 to €200. I am not sure of the intervals and if that is per week or per month. They tend to be small numbers and small amounts. It is really an extra for people in that situation. A community welfare officer might propose an additional needs payment, or ANP, because someone is filling a tank of oil or may have ongoing payments with a bill. It is for people who are in the CWO space.

I am very happy.

An Cathaoirleach

I have two questions, the first of which is for Mr. Hession. While I do not dispute the evidence we have heard from him, based on the evidence we got from the Irish Cancer Society, there is a lack of communication on the heating supplement. Mr. Hession is correct in saying that the safety net is there but it is not being put in place for people who are terminally ill with cancer. I suggest a pilot programme be considered, where we would work with the night nurses with the Irish Cancer Society or the public health nurses across the country who would be well able to identify homes where there is someone terminally ill and there is an issue with lack of fuel. They could communicate with a point of contact within the CWO service to ensure that a payment is issued in those circumstances to circumvent this problem. We do not want to hear evidence such as we heard this morning; there is absolutely no reason for it. There is a weakness in the linkage between both. The HSE or the night nurses may be the ones who could facilitate that. It requires a bit of flexibility from the community welfare officers. They have discretion, and that was put on the public record here. That discretion could easily be used in these circumstances.

Senator Wall spoke this morning about people whose incomes are just over the threshold for the warmer home scheme. The warmer home scheme used to have a provision whereby someone not in receipt of the fuel allowance could have the public health nurse certify a need for the retrofitting to be carried out in a home and be eligible under that scheme. However, that provision has been taken out of the scheme. The committee needs to ensure that it is put back in again.

I also have a question for the Department of Housing. I am disappointed to hear that it will take five years before we will have a full picture of the retrofitting needs in the local authority housing stock across the country. The committee believes we should ensure that all local authority housing stock is up to standard by 2030, not that we should have a picture of what that standard is. An issue that came up in the evidence presented this morning related to the new building regulations for energy efficiency for rental homes that were to be introduced by 2025. I ask Ms Stapleton to give an indication of the timeline for the introduction of those. What has been the Department's engagement with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications on the roadmap for the introduction of the regulations?

Mr. Rónán Hession

We will certainly take that back. We have various referral pathways with the CWOs through other public agencies, including the Garda or whatever, where they come across people who need help. We are certainly happy to pursue that and we will follow it up.

The warmer home scheme is not a scheme on our side but it-----

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Hession.

Ms Áine Stapleton

The state of knowledge of the housing stock is linked somewhat to the progress we are making in a planned maintenance approach by local authorities. This will be a game-changer in our understanding. I appreciate the timelines we have set out to get the entirety of those surveys completed is four to five years. We are building on a good base of knowledge based on the shallow retrofit programme I mentioned earlier. We would now have line of sight regarding over 70,000 of those houses being at a C1 rating. The new housing stock and the current retrofit programme give us a reasonably good state of knowledge.

It gives us a reasonably good state of knowledge. However, it is correct that there are gaps in the knowledge. The surveys underpinned by this new ICT support and the support the Department is giving to the planned maintenance will help. We would hope to see local authorities accelerate those surveys. We are supporting them in that work but, realistically, given there are over 140,000 units in the stock, we will need to give them a reasonable period of time in order for that to be completed. I take on board those comments.

On the private rental sector, work is ongoing to support that objective of the Government. There is a piece of research under our joint research programme with the ESRI. We have asked it to do a piece of research to look at how that might be actioned. It is looking at issues such as what would be required in terms of investment, what kind of financial capacity would be there to support it and what the implications might be. We expect that piece of research to be completed in the second quarter and we will then engage with colleagues in the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications on a roadmap and to look at any challenges that emerge from that research. That is our broad timeline at the moment.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank our guests for their evidence and contributions this morning. Before we conclude our business in public session, I want to welcome Dara O'Sullivan from Belvedere College who is on TY experience in Leinster House this week.

The joint committee went into private session at 12.21 p.m. and adjourned at 12.28 p.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 6 March 2024.

Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands díospóireacht - Wednesday, 28 Feb 2024

Energy Poverty: Discussion (Resumed)

Ms Averil Power

Ms Clare O'Connor

Ms Anna Drynan-Gale

Dr. Suzanne Denieffe

Ms Clare O'Connor

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Ms Averil Power

Ms Clare O'Connor

Ms Averil Power

Ms Clare O'Connor

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Ms Clare O'Connor

Ms Anna Drynan-Gale

Ms Averil Power

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Ms Averil Power

Ms Clare O'Connor

Ms Averil Power

Ms Averil Power

Mr. Jerry Mac Evilly

Ms Averil Power

Ms Averil Power

Ms Averil Power

Dr. Suzanne Denieffe

Ms Averil Power

Ms Anna Drynan-Gale

Ms Clare O'Connor

Mr. Jerry MacEvilly

Mr. Jerry MacEvilly

Ms Áine Stapleton

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Simon Shevlin

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Mr. Eoghan Halvey

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Ms Áine Stapleton

Mr. Noel Halvey

Mr. Noel Halvey

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Ms Áine Stapleton

Mr. Seán Armstrong

Mr. Seán Armstrong

Mr. Seán Armstrong

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Rónán Hession

Mr. Simon Shevlin

Mr. Simon Shevlin

Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 28 Feb 2024