No, I said we do not know what went on or all that was discussed at the meeting. No transcripts on notes or anything were produced afaik. Others have said there needs to be a freedom of information request or something.
You said of the meeting with the Ministers's adviser "Bannon detailed that he and Irwin were briefed on “what the grants were all about”."
I replied : Bannon and his Q.S. should not have needed to request with the Misinster's adviser just to find out “what the grants were all about”.
They were already building professionals, working in the field for many years and it was already their job to know “what the grants were all about”.
We do know because both Bannon and the dept have said what it was about.
If you don't accept that explanation then you are alleging that something else went on at the meeting.
At least be honest about what you are saying as another poster was.
What Bannon and his QS should know or not know is immaterial tbh.
What Bannon and his QS should know is very material. They should have known about the grants before that requested meeting, as they were already well seasoned and experienced professionals in the field. If they did not know about of or about the property grants then, it would not say much about them. Of course they already knew about the grants. They should not have needed a private meeting with a Minister's advisor just to find out “what the grants were all about”, as is claimed. If I or anyone else asked to find out what the grants were all about, I'd be told to look at the government website or ask the local council. I'd say they talked about other things too. Maybe even the weather.;)
Could Francie and Francis start a separate tread (or just private message) where ye can just go over and back all day long repeating everything to each other constantly and leave the rest of us out of it.
Grand, I will not post about last Sunday's house in Cashel on this thread again. I think everything has been said about that anyway.
I admire people who can admit they are not expert or have a full grasp of the detail.
As said previously, Bannon's status and show was beneficial to a Dept wanting to get the existence of grants (which have not, by your own admission been taken up as they should) out there.
Promoting the grants and demonstrating what can be done with them (an advertised feature of this season) was the focus of the series. So being on top of the detail was beneficial to RTE and Bannon. Believing that you could get two grants (First Time Buyers and Vacancy) could easily have been cut out of the show but Bannon does seem to have little problem with showing the mistakes he makes and the fact that he is fallible like us all.
Bannon never does a how about this and it’s tens of thousands under budget. He’s always pushing the budget. Money saved on grants is just spent and not you’ve got some money back. Never see him saying let’s go to IKEA for a kitchen or something else
Francis, your third paragraph, I cannot believe it. If the presentation’s’ main/major focus was the highlighting of grants available, well he made a right ‘dog’s dinner’ of it and the whole thing was very misleading re the derilect not lived in for two years element
. And being falable in he dealing with the core elements of the prog - mainly budget, grants available and grant conditions to be met. Come on. Are these not very much part of the bread and butter of his trade and in relation to the nature of the prog he is presenting? Do’nt tell me that RTE has, indirectly, another Ryan Tubridy type on it ‘s books
Donal Skehan has something to do with it.
When the builder anted up to get the build finished I wonder was he aware that the derelict grant was dependent on retention planning being granted?
I'm surprised they didn't go for 'Help To Buy' grant for their "New Build" as well
How so?
He and his QS talked about the available grants and what had been applied for and the show moved on.
The 'confusion' has arisen because people will not take on board what they are being told. Namely - you cannot use your own definitions of the terms,
The confusion is self inflicted.
Other groups do that as standard. It is said they cost difference between getting solar panels installed using a proper roofer and electrician and an approved SEAI installer is the cost of the grant.
Ya they do, same with agricultural buildings and equipment. Anything there is a grant available for goes through the roof
Sorry for your trouble.
That was sharp practice on the undertaker's part.
He should have stuck to his price.
Maybe after the scandal this week he is taking over from Dermot as the resident architect on the show.
And yes he may know nothing about architecture and have no experience in it but that never stopped him switching careers in the past. All the experienced qualified chefs whose recipes he is "heavily influenced by" in his cook books, will point out that he knew nothing about cooking and had no experience in it before he stopped being a member of a boy band and became a celebrity chef.
A professional who doesn't know how the Help to Buy scheme works.
only got time to watch it this morning
lovely house but i wouldnt like the kitchen and hate the stairs. i must drive over that way some day and have a look.
fair play to them if they can afford to buy a house for 303k and then put 300k into it plus 100k grants. i wonder what its valued at. i cannot see it worth 700k.
i dont know why they didnt buy a wreck of a house and build a new build there for50k and have 550k for the house
this grand situation is getting out of hand. somone needs to come out and clarify whats happening. either the grant scheme is set up wrong or people are taking advantage of it.
Presumably the final two episodes have been very carefully reviewed in light of comments on the initial ones. Expect that they'll have been edited to be vague around grants and criteria, what was sought and what was achieved. And will focus on the great value than Bannon brings to the gig.
I think you are giving to much credence to a ‘controversy’ that never really got off the ground.
A few posts on social media isn’t gonna send editors scurrying tbh.
Well this weekend’s house is Daniel Davey’s and I didn’t think himself and Donal were friends. Don’t why Donal would be in the episode. Suppose I’ll just have to tune in tonight.
Bannon doent bring any value to the the gig, none.
Im beginning to think the only reason people go on the show is for publicity and fame.
Its certainly not for getting value for money.
My thinking it might be to do with kitchen layout/ergonomics of a proper kitchen.
I suppose we will have to tune in.
Job done, a little bit of show biz hype has the desired effect.
That's the way it rolls......🙂
They’re not allowed on the late late show so have to grab the lime light wherever they can.
The programme is dying a death. There is more wrong with it than right. Bannon doesn't give off the same enthusiasm there was before. It's only 4 episodes now, with very little effort they could improve it immeasurably, cut out the fake confrontations, it's vacuous garbage, focus on the building and why key decisions ate made. Hugh Wallace's programmes are superior although Home of the year is getting a bit tired with more of the fakery from the presenters than is necessary.
If you are handing out plaudits for vacuous garbage surely Home Of The Year is the winner? It's Sarah McInerney v Vogue Williams.
Agreed
Do the clients still have to pay Bannon's and the QCs fees? If not then I'd say it's great value if your willing to lay out your personal life on national tv
Welcome to tonight's grant fest 😁
They have a house they bought for 500k I give up
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/761dc761e98b4e4a2ae41c6abf8a928b.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/04cbf1b64e8b0e561c543c5b1091ba30.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b8428f13dfbf05c9d9b1ad3cf5cf9753.svg)
