We have received apologies from Senators Cathal Byrne and Eileen Flynn. I wish to advise members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The first item on the agenda is the minutes. The minutes of the meeting of 25 February have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

We have two items of correspondence for today's meeting. The first item is additional information from the ESRI following the meeting with it on 25 February. Questions included migration and social inclusion, with a focus on housing needs and private pensions - work is under way on the occupational pension coverage in Ireland which the ESRI is expected to publish in June - pension adequacy if home ownership rates of older people decline and the interaction of supply and demand on house prices and household size as an important factor in projecting housing demand and the ESRI input into the review of the national development plan, NDP. The ESRI has done significant research in these areas and has provided extensive documentation. There is quite a volume of different reports it has already published. There were a few specifics we asked for in the last meeting that are not covered in those reports. We have contacted them for further information. We note that.

The next item is information relating to access officers in local authorities from the Disability Federation of Ireland, DFI. This relates to data collected on access across and within local authorities. The information is contained in the document provided. It is very good that this information on the names of the access officers, whether they are full-time or part-time, their other roles in the organisation, which section of the local authority directorate they are responsible to and their consultation method and any further information where provided. However, the DFI is still awaiting information from the following six counties, namely Clare, Longford, Louth, Mayo, Waterford and Roscommon. I propose that he committee write directly to those six local authorities to ask if they have access officers and to give us the details I just mentioned. We have most of the information from the DFI, but we will try to fill the gap directly and will pass the information on to the DFI when we get it. The DFI will find the information in question helpful. I am not saying that local authorities in question do not have access officers, but we do not have the information yet.

There are a couple of points on future meetings. Members will be aware that the Houses will be in recess next week. We have two meetings - scheduled for 18 and 25 March - before the Houses adjourn for the Easter recess. I propose that we focus on housing for these meetings. The committee has looked at matters around housing delivery, such as development issues, regulation, utility connections, land zoning at council and disabled access to housing. The committee has already agreed to invite the Minister for housing to appear before it. I propose that we hold two sessions on the housing issue, one with the Minister and one with the newly appointed chief executive of the housing activation office. We have no confirmation of those yet. I propose that if neither is available, we invite representatives from the National Economic and Social Council, NESC, which has produced a report on this and would make a worthwhile contribution, and the National Development Finance Agency and the National Treasury Management Agency, NTMA, which provide financial advice to the State in respect of public investment projects in the national development plan that have a value of over €75 million, to come before us. Those are very big. There are four possibilities there. If we get the Minister and his Department separately that is fine. If not, I suggest that we invite NESC and the National Development Finance Agency. We will leave it to the secretariat to see who is available but we have options for the next couple of meetings.

I say this because we do not yet know the position. The Department has not yet decided whether the planning and infrastructure Bill coming before the Oireachtas will go to the select committee on finance and public expenditure or to us. We do not know and it will not be our call. If it comes to us we will have to deal with that legislation on Committee Stage. There was an understanding at the outset that we would be a bit like the Committee of Public Accounts whereby we would not be tied up with legislation and would let the line Department do it. However, because the legislation is absolutely specifically aligned with the work of this committee, it may come before us. We do not know yet. That is for the Department and the Minister to decide.

It would be a good thing if it came before us.

We would be happy to do it.

We could get more stuck into it.

Yes. As I said at the outset, if the Department is interested, I put this on the public record that we would be happy to deal with Committee Stage of the legislation or to do whatever needs to be done at committee level. The Government is keen to get it done as soon as possible in order that we can get on with business.

Sure.

We will suspend briefly while we bring in our witnesses.