Ireland may be about to create an entirely new residential construction market, but the opportunity is being misunderstood.
In April, the Irish Government announced proposed planning exemptions that would allow a detached auxiliary dwelling of between 32 m² and 45 m² to be built behind an existing home and connected to the main house’s services. The detailed conditions have not yet been finalised, and the regulations still require environmental assessment and Oireachtas approval.
That distinction matters. This is not simply permission to place a larger garden room beside the patio. It is a proposal to create a new home without the conventional planning process.
Homenot a shed!
And a home is not a shed with better finishes. The Government has explicitly stated that all relevant Building Regulations, Building Control requirements and fire-safety rules will continue to apply. Removing planning permission does not remove the obligation to design, construct and certify a safe, energy-efficient dwelling.
That is where the real market disruption begins. Ireland already has a capable garden-room sector supplying offices, gyms, studios and leisure spaces. Many of those companies deliver attractive buildings quickly and efficiently. But a structure intended for occasional use is fundamentally different from a dwelling occupied every day and night. A compliant home must address structure, insulation, ventilation, airtightness, energy performance, drainage, fire safety, radon protection, access and long-term durability. Depending on the final regulatory route, it may also require professional design input, a commencement notice, inspection documentation, energy assessment and completion certification. These obligations are not administrative extras. They are the product.
The commercial risk is obvious. Homeowners may compare two buildings that appear almost identical online: one offered as an inexpensive “garden pod” and another priced as a fully designed and certified dwelling. The cheaper option may win at the kitchen table because the most important differences are hidden inside the floor, walls, roof, ventilation system and compliance file. Those differences may only become visible years later — during a sale, an insurance claim, a mortgage application or an investigation following a fire or structural failure.
That creates four urgent challenges for the industry. ► First, design must become repeatable. The strongest providers will develop standardised systems that can be engineered, energy-modelled and documented once, then adapted responsibly for each site. ► Second, buyers need meaningful protection. A marketing promise or company guarantee is not the same as independent certification, professional indemnity cover and a credible structural warranty. ► Third, contractors need a clear delivery process. Responsibility for design, assigned roles, inspections, testing and handover documentation must be established before work begins — not assembled retrospectively when a customer asks for proof. ► Fourth, the public needs better information. “Planning exempt” must never be allowed to become shorthand for “unregulated.”
There is also confusion around tax. Revenue currently allows up to €14,000 of qualifying Rent-a-Room income to be exempt from Income Tax, PRSI and USC. However, current guidance says a detached self-contained unit does not qualify. The Government has only committed to considering how auxiliary dwellings might interact with the relief. The opportunity remains substantial. Families need flexible accommodation. Adult children need routes to independence. Older homeowners need options. Ireland needs additional housing capacity.
But the winners will not be the businesses that manufacture the cheapest box. They will be the contractors and partners that can deliver a genuine home: designed correctly, built safely, tested properly, certified transparently and supported long after handover. That is the standard serious builders should establish before the first advertising campaign begins.
In this market, compliance will not slow the sale. Compliance will be the sale.
Ireland’s latest greenhouse gas figures bring a welcome headline: emissions fell again in 2025. But behind that progress lies a much harder truth. The country is still nowhere near the pace of change required to meet its legally binding climate targets, and the next few years are likely to be far more difficult than the last few.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s provisional figures show that Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 2.2% in 2025, equivalent to 1.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. It was the fourth year in a row that emissions fell. Reductions were recorded across all main sectors, with the biggest falls in energy industries, buildings, industry and transport.
That is encouraging. It shows that emissions can fall while Ireland’s economy and population continue to grow. It also suggests that policy, investment and cleaner technology are beginning to have an effect.
But the scale of the challenge remains stark. Ireland’s national climate law requires a 51% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared with 2018 levels. By 2025, emissions had fallen by only 14.5% when land use, land-use change and forestry are included. The EPA has warned that emissions must now fall by more than 10% every year to 2030 if Ireland is to meet its national climate target.
That is the central difficulty. A 2.2% annual fall is progress, but it is not enough. Ireland is moving in the right direction, yet not nearly fast enough. The easier gains may also be running out. The energy sector has delivered major reductions, helped by renewable electricity, less fossil-fuel generation and changes in the power system. Emissions from power generation and large industrial companies fell by 5.5% in 2025, according to the EPA. But future reductions will increasingly depend on harder-to-change parts of daily life: how people travel, how homes are heated, how farms produce food, how industry uses energy, and how quickly infrastructure can be built.
Transport is one of the biggest warning signs. Emissions fell in 2025, helped by more biofuel use and rising electricity consumption in road transport. But transport still exceeded its sectoral ceiling. This points to a deeper problem: Ireland is making improvements, but car dependency, slow public transport delivery, rising travel demand and freight emissions continue to make transport one of the most difficult sectors to decarbonise.
Industry faces similar pressure. Industrial emissions fell in 2025, but the sector still overshot its ceiling. Some reductions can come from fuel switching or lower fossil-fuel use, but long-term progress will require deeper changes in manufacturing, cement production, industrial heat and investment in cleaner processes. That will not be simple, cheap or quick.
Agriculture remains perhaps the most politically sensitive challenge. The 2025 fall in agricultural emissions was very small. Lower cattle numbers helped, but this was offset by increased fertiliser use and higher milk production. Agriculture is central to rural Ireland and the national economy, but it is also a major source of methane and nitrous oxide. Reducing these emissions at the speed required will involve difficult choices about land use, herd size, fertiliser, food production and farm incomes.
Buildings offer another mixed picture. Emissions fell in 2025, helped by a warmer winter and reduced fossil-fuel use. Residential emissions are now much lower than in previous decades. But warmer weather is not a climate policy. Lasting reductions will require faster retrofitting, more heat pumps, improved energy efficiency, skilled workers and financial supports that make upgrades realistic for households and businesses.
Ireland also faces a serious EU compliance challenge. Under the EU Effort Sharing Regulation, Ireland must reduce emissions in sectors such as agriculture, transport, buildings, waste and smaller industry by 42% by 2030compared with 2005. The EPA says Ireland is projected to miss that target, with a maximum projected reduction of 23% by 2030 even under a scenario with additional measures.
The cost of missing targets could be significant. Reuters reported that Ireland’s fiscal and climate watchdogs warned the State could face EU compliance costs ranging from €8 billion to €26 billion by 2030, if emissions-reduction plans are not delivered. That means failure would not simply be environmental. It could become a major financial burden on the public purse. There is a risk that one positive year creates a false sense of security. Falling emissions are welcome, but climate targets are not judged by headlines. They are judged by cumulative reductions, carbon budgets and legally binding limits. Ireland may be provisionally under its first carbon budget, but future budgets will be tighter and harder to meet.
The real test now is delivery. Targets have been set. Carbon budgets have been agreed. Sectoral ceilings have been created. The legal framework is in place. What Ireland needs next is faster implementation; more renewable power, stronger grids, cleaner transport, warmer homes, lower-emission farming, industrial investment and public policies that make low-carbon choices affordable and practical.
Ireland’s emissions are falling. That matters. But the road to 2030 is getting steeper, not easier.The 2025 figures should be welcomed, but they should not be mistaken for success. They are a reminder that progress has begun, and that the hardest work is still ahead.
Thurles, Co. Tipperary did not decline overnight. It has been weakened over decades by the loss of major employers, the failure to replace them at scale, and town-centre decisions that have made Liberty Square less convenient for the very businesses it is supposed to support.
Over the past 50 years, Thurles, has lost some of the employers that once gave the town real economic strength. The Sugar Factory closure remains one of the deepest blows in local memory. Later came further losses: GMX, BSN Medical, Erin Foods and others. In the Seanad in 2007, the pattern was described clearly; since the loss of the Sugar Factory, Thurles had suffered repeated job losses in Barlow, BSN Medical, GMX and Erin Foods.
These were not minor losses. BSN Medical announced in 2006 that it would cease manufacturing in Thurles, with 80 jobs to go. Erin Foods, which had operated in Thurles for 46 years, was then marked for closure with the loss of 95 jobs. The closure of GMX / Moulinex had already removed around 230 jobs from the town. When these losses are added to the Sugar Factory and smaller vanished industries, the picture is obvious: Thurles lost a serious employment base and never got it back.
Yes, there have been minor replacements announced and some investment. Dew Valley Foods, Lidl, smaller enterprise supports, the university presence and the ThurlesShopping Centre have all brought activity. But they have not replaced the scale or quality of what was lost. A town cannot lose major factories and long-standing employers and then be told that scattered retail jobs, short-term construction work and small-scale schemes are the same thing. They are not.
[Song hereunder ,“Rust & Rain”, is AI-generated entirely by Dallas Ray Little(operating under the label Crusty Records)]
Even An Taoiseach Mr Micheál Martin appeared to acknowledge this failure in Dáil Éireann on June 10th 2026, when he said he had “often thought Thurles would have done better because of its location” and noted that not everywhere near the motorway had received the same degree of foreign direct investment. That single comment says a great deal. For decades, Thurles was told that its central location, rail access and proximity to major routes should be an advantage. Yet the town watched major employers disappear, while replacement investment went elsewhere. If even the Taoiseach is surprised that Thurles has not benefited properly from its location, then local people are entitled to ask why successive governments, state agencies and elected representatives allowed that failure to continue for so long.
Tipperary County Council’s own Thurles Local Area Plan confirms the weakness of the employment base. It states that Thurles has a relatively low jobs ratio of 1.01 compared with Clonmel at 1.39 and Nenagh at 1.22. It also records that just under half of resident workers are employed in Thurles, while many others work elsewhere in Tipperary or outside the county. That is not the profile of a town that has been properly protected or rebuilt after decades of industrial loss.
The same plan says Thurles is a “Key Town” and speaks of supporting employment, prosperity, regeneration and revitalisation. But people in Thurles have heard plans, strategies and promises for years. What they can see with their own eyes is different; empty premises, weakened footfall, businesses struggling, and employment lands that have not delivered the kind of jobs once provided by the town’s former industrial base.
Liberty Square is the clearest example of the problem. Tipperary County Council’s Phase 2 public realm proposal includes wider footpaths, raised crossings, road-layout changes, a one-way system on Cuchulain Road, and the relocation of 12 parking bays from the central island car park. The Council presents this as enhancement. Many traders see it differently. For a rural market town, convenient short-stay parking is not a luxury; it is part of how the town trades.
The long-awaited Thurles bypass is another example of how the town has been pushed down the road for decades. The need is obvious; heavy traffic and HGVs continue to pass through the heart of Thurles, including Liberty Square, while the town centre is simultaneously expected to become a more attractive public realm. Those two aims are in conflict. Press reported in November 2025 that the “long awaited and badly needed” bypass was back on the Government agenda, noting that it would ease congestion in the heart of the town where heavy goods vehicles regularly clog Liberty Square. Yet Tipperary County Council’s own 2026 budget material stated that while a route had been selected and a reserved corridor was in place, the Council would continue lobbying for the project to be included in the National Development Plan. By March 2026, the project had only received a €50,000 allocation to progress early design work with TII. After so many years, that is not delivery; it is another promise pushed into the future.
Long awaited Thurles bypass selected route/reserved corridor still only receives early-stage funding/progression in 2026
A town centre like Thurles depends on easy access. People call in to collect prescriptions, go to the post office, visit the butcher, chemist, café, solicitor, barber, newsagent or bank, and then move on. If parking is removed, made awkward, pushed away, or controlled in a way that does not suit shoppers, people change habits. They go where parking is free, plentiful and easy. In Thurles, that increasingly means the shopping centre or edge-of-town retail or indeed another nearby town.
The pull of the shopping centre is not imaginary. Thurles Shopping Centre is marketed as having more than 55,000 visitors per week and 550 free multi-storey parking spaces. That is a huge advantage over Liberty Square with its parking charges. When the Council reduces or reconfigures central parking while the shopping centre offers hundreds of free spaces, it should surprise nobody that trade drifts away from the historic core.
Parking charges resulted in the relocation of the post office, seen as yet another major blow. In 2019, An Post moved from Liberty Square to Thurles Shopping Centre. Local concern at the time was that the move would reduce footfall in the town centre. An Post said the old building was not viable and that the new location would provide improved services, but the result for Liberty Square was still the loss of a key daily footfall generator.
This is the core issue; decisions may be justified one by one, but their combined effect has damaged the heart of Thurles. One decision removes jobs, while another fails to replace them. Another moves a key service while another reduces convenient parking and then another produces a plan promising regeneration at some later date. Over time, the town centre is weakened not by one single act, but by a long chain of decisions that fail to protect how a real town works.
It would be unfair to claim that every closure was caused by councillors, the Council or TII. Companies close for many reasons: restructuring, costs, competition, building condition, online shopping and changing consumer behaviour. But it is entirely fair to say that successive politicians, councillors, agencies and planners have failed to secure a proper replacement employment base for Thurles and have failed to protect Liberty Square as a practical commercial centre.
The people of Thurles do not need more glossy language about regeneration. They need jobs, occupied buildings, realistic parking, fair access, active streets and a town centre that serves local traders as well as public-realm theory. A square can look tidier on a drawing and still fail commercially. A plan can sound modern and still damage small businesses. A town can be called a “Key Town” in official documents and still be treated like an afterthought in practice.
Thurles deserves better than managed decline. It deserves leadership that understands the town’s history, its losses, its trading patterns and its people. After 50 years of industrial closures, weak replacement employment and the hollowing-out of Liberty Square, the question is not whether Thurles has been let down. The question is who is finally going to take responsibility for reversing the damage.
A total of 9,882 complaints and queries were handled by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland’s (FSAI) Advice Line in 2025. Announcing details today of the complaints and queries last year, the FSAI stated that there were 6,135 complaints from consumers, with 33% of complaints relating to unfit food and 28% to poor hygiene standards.
Overall, the 6,135 consumer complaints in 2025 represented a 23% increase compared to the previous year with 4,996 complaints. The figures reflect an upward trend over the past decade. All complaints received by the FSAI in 2025 were followed up and investigated by food inspectors throughout the country.
Unfit food, which is food that is not safe to eat, was the most frequently reported complaint in 2025. Unfit food also includes contamination with a foreign object. Commonly reported foreign objects in food included: plastic, a battery, insects/caterpillar, slug, and fingernail. Examples of some of the complaints include: a fingernail found in a cake; a staple found in an Indian meal; a battery found in a pack of almonds; a fly floating in a milk bottle; a slug in a noodle dish and a live moth in a bag of salad.
The second most frequently reported category related to poor hygiene standards. Common complaints included rodents spotted in food businesses; staff not wearing appropriate clothing; poor personal hygiene with staff not changing gloves often enough; staff not washing hands; staff smoking in their aprons; and food not being stored correctly with fridges and freezers not cold enough.
The third most frequently reported category related to reports of suspected food poisoning making up 26% of the total complaints in 2025. This was a decrease from 29% in 2024.
The breakdown of all complaints are as follows: Unfit food: 2,030 Hygiene standards: 1,693 Suspect food poisoning: 1,570 Labelling: 656 Allergen Information: 150 Others: 36
Mr Greg Dempsey, (Chief Executive, FSAI), stressed the importance of making complaints to the FSAI, so that any food safety issues can be addressed. “Public reporting of food safety concerns plays a vital role in supporting the work of the food safety inspectorate and is an important part of how we protect public health. We greatly value the contribution of consumers in bringing potential issues to our attention, as these reports provide essential information that complements the work of Environmental Health Officers, veterinary and agricultural inspectors, sea-fisheries officers, and laboratory services. While routine inspections and food sampling programmes remain a core part of our regulatory activity, complaints allow us to quickly identify and respond to specific risks, ensuring that any potential threats to food safety are addressed without delay. The continued increase in engagement reflects growing consumer awareness and confidence in reporting issues, as well as a strong expectation that high standards of food safety and hygiene are consistently maintained across the food chain. In particular, we have seen a significant rise in complaints relating to unfit food and poor hygiene standards, and we would like to thank the public for their continued vigilance in helping us address these issues.”
The FSAI Advice Line also offers advice and information. During 2025, there were 3,747 queries from people working in the food industry, including caterers, food manufacturers, retailers, and others. Popular topics included: how to start a food business; food labelling information; best practice in food businesses; food safety training and several others.
The FSAI Advice Line is contactable through our online complaint form ‘makeitbetter’ or through our online query form. The FSAI Instagram,Facebook and LinkedIn pages are also resources with up-to-the-minute information in relation to food safety.
Fine Gael TD for Co. Clare, Mr Joe Cooney has received confirmation from Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment Mr Peter Burke, that a leading Irish company is expected to announce a significant investment in Shannon this summer.
Raising the issue the Dáil during a Topical Issue debate on industrial development and employment opportunities in the Mid-West region, (latter which covers three counties: Tipperary, Clare and Limerick, with a population of 473,269 or about 9.94% of Ireland’s total population), Deputy Joe Cooney said the expected announcement would be a strong boost for the region.
Deputy Cooney said the development would be a key step in strengthening the region as a counterbalance to Dublin’s economic concentration. He stated, “The over concentration of development in Dublin is not just a Dublin issue, it is a national planning challenge. The Mid-West, and Shannon in particular, can and should act as a counterbalance, providing space, capacity and opportunity for sustainable economic growth.” He further stated that Shannon has the infrastructure and capacity to support major investment, “Shannon offers what Dublin increasingly cannot, including space for enterprise, aviation development, space for housing, and space within the planning system to move with speed and ambition. That is why it is ideally placed to support Ireland’s next phase of balanced regional development.”
Minister Burke told the Dáil that the Mid-West region was “uniquely positioned” for enterprise growth and confirmed that a major announcement was expected later this summer.
He continued, “There will be a very significant announcement during the summer by a leading Irish-born company in relation to Shannon. This will be a strong testament to the work of Government in providing key infrastructure and supporting a highly skilled workforce.”
The Minister added that Government policy was focused on “unlocking the full economic potential of all regions”, highlighting Shannon Airport, Foynes Port and strong links with third-level institutions in the Mid-West. Deputy Cooney said the region must continue to be developed as a genuine alternative economic hub, “Balanced regional development cannot just be a policy aspiration. It has to be delivered in practice. Shannon has the assets, the talent and the ambition to play a central role in delivering that balance.”
He said he would continue to work with Government, agencies and local stakeholders to secure further investment and employment opportunities in the region.
The details of the investment are expected to be announced later this summer.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Recent Comments