Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

While Fianna Fáil welcomes the Bill, we believe it does not go far enough in remediating the problems faced by thousands of home owners across Leinster. The remediation fund seriously underestimates the scale of the problem, the extent of which has not been fully uncovered and the presence of pyrite will only become fully apparent in the coming years. Home owners who have already spent considerable sums repairing their houses should also be covered by some mechanism for making retrospective payments.

It is welcome that the Pyrite Resolution Board is being put on a statutory footing. The Bill sets out the details of the €10 million remediation scheme for houses in the counties affected, namely, Fingal, Kildare, Meath and Offaly. This long awaited legislation is a significant step towards alleviating the distress endured by home owners affected by the scourge of pyrite.

However, as I stated, it needs to be substantially enhanced and combined with real financial backup if it is to mark an end to the hardship endured by all home owners involved.

There are concerns, which I have expressed in the past, about the methodology used to quantify the number of houses affected by pyrite difficulties. Unfortunately, the Minister, Deputy Hogan, has consistently understated the scale of the problem. The scale that has been mentioned stands in stark contrast to the many tens of thousands of houses estimated to be affected by independent assessments, and I hope the scheme will be sufficiently flexible and well financed, in the future if not immediately, to accommodate the prospect of further pyrite-affected homes being uncovered in the coming years. I reiterate that home owners who have taken the initiative in rectifying problems with their houses should be covered, if not by this Bill then by amendments made thereto, rather than punished by denying them compensation.

The other issue that needs to be mentioned is the failure to address the impact of the denial of insurance to those in pyrite-affected estates, even in respect of homes that are not directly affected at this stage. The property tax exemption should be extended to cover these estates as a whole.

The pyrite report went a long way towards bringing us to this juncture. As I stated, there are concerns about the methodology used to quantify the number of houses affected by pyrite difficulties. According to the report, more than 12,000 homes in 74 unnamed estates could potentially be contaminated with the material from five quarries. This stands in contrast to the 72,500 houses estimated to be affected by independent assessment. Why is there such a dramatic gap between the original estimates and the number found by the panel? What specific methodology was used to quantify the houses affected?

See this speech in context