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

The report concluded that the remaining 10,300 ground floor dwellings represent the maximum estimated future potential exposure to pyrite problems. Tackling the problem through the laborious method of removing the pyrite requires major intervention, and the typical cost for an average house is estimated at up to €45,000. This represents a massive cost to struggling home owners. In view of the scale of the problem, the Minister needs to provide strong legal support to these home owners. Home owners who have already taken action to deal with their own problems should not be penalised for taking action. The scheme should also encompass them.

The Government may have to offer additional financial support to bolster the remediation scheme next year to meet its immediate requirements. As the scale of the problem emerges, additional assistance will be required. I expect that the Minister will recognise this in today's debate.

Arising from the report, the board was established in 2012 on a pro bono basis. The board, as the Minister stated, was empowered to take a flexible long-term approach. Is the Minister sure that the €10 million fund is adequate to deal with the real scale of the problem? We do not want a situation in which ordinary home owners are left to pay the price for the failure to directly confront this.

The panel found that the regulatory framework for hardcore in Ireland, prior to the identification of problems with pyritic heave, could be compared favourably with those in the UK and other jurisdictions where guidance evolved in response to specific problems.

Currently, the only way to ameliorate pyrite heave is to remove the ground slab containing the pyritic material and replace it with a new ground slab. The general process involved will see people leave their homes for up to 12 weeks while work is undertaken.

While a number of measures were taken subsequent to the discovery of problems, the Minister must ensure that the regulatory regime remains as strong as other jurisdictions in dealing with the problem. We cannot afford to allow this type of problem to emerge in the future. The Minister's much-vaunted building regulation standards must be adequately enforced by local authorities and kept under revision to ensure they meet the reality of construction on the ground.

My party welcomes the Bill. We acknowledge the work that has been done heretofore by the Minister and his Department in bringing about this solution, however small it might be at this stage. The scope of the scheme is open to further investment in the future if it emerges that the problem is much greater than initially envisaged, and I expect the Minister will make a commitment in that regard. I reiterate my contention that there should be some cognisance of the difficulties that exist and the lack of compensation for those who have rectified the problem already in the absence of adequate insurance, and that there should be some retrospective option for them to apply to the board for funding to be made available to recognise their difficulties and the necessity of saving their homes. My party will not oppose the Bill, but we hope, through the various Stages - no matter how short - to explore its contents in order to ensure that there will be the option in the future of addressing some of the issues I raised in my opening statement.

See this speech in context