Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for being here. I will focus my questions on the Mayo witnesses. I know Ms Murphy has been dealing with this for a long time and during the course of her answers she might tell us how long it has been exactly. Ms Hegarty has been dealing with it for the past number of years as well.

I have three questions. I know our main aim is to have the scheme fit for purpose and nobody is locked out because he or she cannot afford to get into it. With regard to retrospective flexibility, I am aware one homeowner in Mayo had to replace her home because her engineer told her she was in danger of a catastrophic event. She had absolutely no option. Why do the witnesses think it important that there is a retrospective element, albeit very limited, to the scheme?

What does option 1 mean to the witnesses and how do they know other options are not acceptable? Ms Hegarty stated the only solution for pyrite impact is total demolition, including foundations. Why are homeowners in Mayo deeply concerned about the introduction of the damage threshold? That builds on what Ms Hegarty has already said.