The Taoiseach spoke earlier about the need for housing and everyone right around the Dáil here agrees on the urgent need for more houses. He spoke about 50,000 houses and it is welcome that he has that aspiration and the policy to try to back it up but I would like to go to the nuts and bolts of this. At the moment in Ireland, a person with a small quarry will be four to five years trying to get planning and will have to spend a minimum of €300,000 on reports and getting through the planning process. The Minister of State, Deputy Grealish, is beside the Taoiseach. From Galway city to the Atlantic Ocean is probably 50 miles at least and there is not one quarry in that area now because they are all being blocked.

Looking at the cost, a load of stone and six-inch down in 2013 was €4 a tonne ex-pit; it is about €12 a tonne now. This is what you call costs rising constantly. Then we talk about muck away. On 1 March this year, for the small operators that take away muck from housing sites, €10 a tonne is going onto a load of muck. That is €200 a load. Some €3,000 for a semi-detached is going onto a load of muck and each house being built, and the Government talks about cutting costs. Then, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, and the Department are going to say, "Ah well, sure there is way out" and there are Articles 27 and 28.

I will give the Taoiseach the facts of Article 27. First, under Article 27, if I buy new stone off a quarry - if I bring it in for what we call a haul road, where it will be taken away again - to take that new stone away from that site, I have to employ a person and get a report done for €1,500 now, plus €250 each for the two samples. That is €2,000 more to take the stone out as per the new regulation that has gone in under Article 27. Article 28 is where - I will explain it to the Taoiseach - if you had a house down the country that needed knocking, and you basically knocked it down, put it in a crusher and crushed it up, you would have to spend the same money on that house to be able to move that stone. That is what we are doing at the moment.

In relation to concrete, in 2020 concrete was about €70 to €80 per cu. m. It is gone to €130 at the moment and is going up again by €10 because of carbon taxes, they will tell you, electricity costs and obviously the defective blocks are going to be part of it. They are saying very clearly it is because of what they call the greenwashing that is going on in this country. How does the Taoiseach propose, in the line of planning for quarries, to reduce that figure and keep them in the game? Is he going to allow stone shifted from site that was bought new to be exempted?

I thank Deputy Fitzmaurice. The Taoiseach will now respond.

Coming out of the weeds, or the mud, maybe, what the Deputy is talking about is the overarching planning framework that governs development in the country, the extraction of stone from quarries or the creation of quarries, or indeed other environmental legislation, but I am not quite clear on the specifics of what he is actually seeking. Let us start from the fundamental premise that we do need a planning framework. We need a sustainable planning framework and we need sustainability. That is the basic position we come from. We then have to be pragmatic, balanced, efficient and effective in the deployment of those planning laws. There has to be timely consideration of planning applications and we have to do everything we possibly can to reduce costs.

The biggest cause of the inflationary pressures of the past number of years was the post-Covid period where supply chains had broken down and there was an inflationary surge, and the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis that emerged. We had very significant inflationary pressures which then impacted the construction industry in particular.

We have resourced An Coimisiún Pleanála very significantly and it would acknowledge that. It has now created timelines for any planning applications. In many cases, it is now beginning to get close to meeting those timelines. We have also substantially resourced the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, in respect of its obligations. The European Union directives on the habitats directive and on environmental law generally and consents are there. They are real. They can be judicially reviewed at any time and they can be contested. The role of the planning authority is to make sure that when decisions are taken, both at local authority level and at An Coimisiún Pleanála level, they are robust, resilient decisions that can stand the test of any potential legal challenge. That is a reality. You cannot take shortcuts in respect of the EU directives.

The European Union is looking at simplification of those directives and of the environmental obligations. It is examining those. I have made the case to Europe that we need to be far more pragmatic in terms of how some of these apply. The balance has to be struck between a responsible approach to sustainability and a pragmatic one as well, and best practice from observing what is going on in other jurisdictions close to us as well to make sure we are doing it in a balanced and effective way. I have not had a submission from the quarry industry. Perhaps others in different Departments have but I would gladly receive one and engage with the industry to discuss it.

What I am saying to the Taoiseach is that the facts are, if I am a small quarry operator, it is going to cost me €300,000 to do the reports that those planners need. That is not sustainable for the small guy. Does the Taoiseach realise that at this minute - I will put it on record here - we are heading for four quarries in Ireland because the big guys are mopping up? I would urge the Taoiseach to get someone to research, through the Land Registry, who owns the quarries in Ireland.

Four of them are buying up everything around them because they have the legal eagles, the accountants and the funds behind them, and the small guy is being pushed out of it. Those are the facts of what is going on. I understand about the habitats directive, but look at what is going on in this country in relation to that. Also, the Department of the environment has brought in recycling under Article 27 and Article 28. Does the Taoiseach realise who is setting up those plants around Ireland, because it is €12 million to set that up?

The time is up. I call the Taoiseach to respond.

What will the small fellow with three or four lorries do in some small town when he is trying to build? He has to bring his muck away.

The time is up. I call the Taoiseach to respond.

Have a look at what is going on. Open your eyes to what is happening.

I call the Taoiseach to respond.

We are heading for four quarries in this country that will own recycling, and own the quarrying of this country.

Deputy, the time is up. I call the Taoiseach to respond.

We cannot see what is happening. You know what happens then - up with the price.

Deputy Fitzmaurice, the time is up.

First of all, recycling works in construction. I can recall that in advance of the London Olympics, and how many years ago is that-----

England has different rules.

Deputy, you are no different from anybody else. Do not interrupt the answer.

The Deputy did not even let me finish, or begin, actually.

Prior to the London Olympics, I was Minister for enterprise when many construction companies in Ireland wanted to see if they could submit, tender and so on. The objective was up to 80% or 90% recycling for all the demolition and everything in respect of that. That was not law. That was their objective and their vision. Recycling is very important.

It is a different system.

No, Deputy.

We should do it.

Yes, but it is a different system.

Deputy, stop.

It can be done, and it is being done.

On the competition issue, the Deputy is saying that it is going to be reduced to four. We have the competition and consumer authority. Its job is to make sure there is competition in the market. If there are any complaints or if people have concerns about any unsavoury practices developing, then please submit that to the competition authority.

We are burying our heads in the sand.