James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I welcome the opportunity to outline the provisions of the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks (Amendment) Bill 2025. I have met many people the defective concrete blocks issue affects, particularly in the north-western region. I am here today because I have listened to their concerns and to the issues raised by local representatives and advocacy groups on these matters. I am therefore proposing this Bill to amend the current scheme by dealing with a number of issues that have arisen to date to ensure everyone is fairly dealt with in terms of support.

Looking briefly to the past, Deputies will recall that the first defective concrete blocks grant scheme, often referred to as the 90:10 scheme, came into effect in January 2020 and included counties Donegal and Mayo. Building on the work of that scheme, the Government approved the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Bill 2022 on 21 June 2022 and the Bill passed through both Houses of the Oireachtas and was subsequently signed into law by the President on 23 July 2022. This scheme included an unprecedented suite of improvements and still represents the largest State intervention to address defective buildings anywhere in the world, with the scheme estimated to cost approximately €2.2 billion excluding inflation. Changes introduced by the original legislation included a Government guarantee of remediation works, other than full demolition and rebuild, through eligibility, if required, for a second grant for a period of 40 years; provision of alternative accommodation costs, storage costs and costs for immediate repairs; a key role for the Housing Agency; the extension of the scheme to Clare and Limerick; the introduction of an appeals panel; and increased scheme caps and grant rates.

In 2024, the grant scheme cap was increased again by the maximum permitted, 10% to €462,000, along with an increase in the scheme grant rates. Sligo County Council was also designated under the scheme, with more local authorities to join in the coming months. The amendments brought forward in today's legislation aim to further improve the grant scheme for impacted homeowners. These changes go a long way to address the needs raised by homeowners. The draft amendment Bill follows on from the general scheme and reflects the decisions made by the Government on 4 June 2025.

At this point, I wish to draw attention to the key changes and main provisions of the Bill. It contains 28 sections. It will widen the group of relevant owners who can avail of the most recent increases in the grant scheme cap and rates. It will allow relevant owners who have incurred qualifying expenditure since 29 March 2024 that was unpaid due to them reaching the maximum scheme cap in place at the time of €420,000 to now be able to apply to their designated local authority to have a new remediation option grant amount determined in line with the increased scheme cap and rates. On receipt of this new grant amount, relevant owners will then be able to submit unpaid invoices for consideration and payment to their designated local authority in line with the new grant amount. Many owners will then be able to claim thousands of additional euro in support. The National Standards Authority of Ireland, NSAI, has recently confirmed that the forthcoming revised national standard, IS 465, will be published in quarter 1 of 2026. Relevant owners in the scheme who were previously given a non-demolition option - option 2 to 5 - and who were yet to commence works or cease works on site as of 6 November 2024 will now be able to apply for a technical review of the determined remediation option and grant amount in line with the new standard on its publication.

Under the 2022 Act, relevant owners who have reached the maximum scheme grant cap cannot apply for ancillary grants. The amendment contained in the Bill will allow this cohort to apply for ancillary grants while still ensuring that the overall total payment to the homeowners remains within the grant scheme allowable amounts. The 2022 Act does not allow a person who does not satisfy the definition of a relevant owner to become a relevant owner where he or she is or was in a relationship with a relevant owner. It was brought to my attention that this was proving problematic for certain applicants to the scheme. The amendment will facilitate this for married couples and those who are in a civil partnership or are cohabiting. It is a sound, practical change to help in these circumstances.

Following consultation with the stakeholder groups, it became apparent that the time limits for completing remediation works were proving difficult for certain homeowners. The Act as it stands allows a maximum of 65 weeks to complete remediation works on commencement and a requirement to apply 12 weeks in advance of this expiry period to seek a further extension of up to an additional 24 weeks. The amendment will increase the time to complete works from 65 weeks to 130 weeks and reduce the application time from 12 weeks to two weeks for an extension. This will relieve the pressure and stress on homeowners. The Act allows for the sharing of certain information with the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, by designated local authorities where it is necessary and proportionate. Following a request to my Department received from the SEAI, the Bill contains an amendment that will allow it to share information with designated local authorities to ensure that it does not double-fund payments it makes under its energy retrofit scheme to defective concrete blocks grant scheme applicants. The retrospective element of the Bill may result in certain applicants receiving additional funding where a designated local authority has created a charging order over their right to sell property on completion of remediation works. The amendment will allow for the creation of a second charge if required.

There are further amendments to the Bill to be proposed on Committee Stage. Two specific issues around how the defective concrete blocks grant scheme operates have come to my attention in recent months. I intend to include these as additional amendments on Committee Stage. I would have preferred to have these included now in the version of the Bill before the House, but the changes require significant thought and attention and the resulting drafting process has taken a little longer than expected. The first amendment relates to allowing for an exemption from the general principal of the scheme, for example that houses be remediated in more or less the exact location as they are now. Noting the difficulties that certain vulnerable relevant owners and family members may face in finding suitable alternative accommodation, this amendment will allow for the construction of adjacent dwellings in limited circumstances.

I think this change will make a real difference to families, for example those whose current homes have been modified to take care of the physical and mental needs of family members.

The second amendment relates to facilitating owners of certain conjoined homes, for example semi-detached or terraced homes, to enter the scheme at an earlier time, thus potentially facilitating joint building work. In a number of conjoined dwellings, one dwelling may meet the damage threshold of the grant scheme and the other, although displaying visual signs, may not meet the damage threshold at the time. The amendment will allow in certain situations that the requirement for a dwelling to meet the damage threshold may be waived in order to facilitate an early grant option and determination by the Housing Agency.

I also intend to bring forward a number of amendments to the Building Control Acts of 1990 to 2020 to provide for the making of building regulations and the building control regulations and to set out the legislative basis for the system of enforcement. These are being made on foot of legal cases taken against the State and subsequent advice from the Attorney General and the Building Control Act as amended.

While I am satisfied that the scheme is delivering for many homeowners in affected counties, with more than €235 million spent on the scheme to date, I remain acutely aware that it needs to be closely monitored and changed as our experience and knowledge of this complex issue develops. That is what this Bill is about. It builds on the Government funding for defective concrete block work that continues to be provided as and when required on an annual basis, with a record €175 million allocated to fund the scheme in 2026. I met various stakeholders in Donegal earlier this year, including representatives from the Mica Action Group along with a large number of Donegal county councillors from all parties and none and senior management in the council. Each group raised important matters, including the need to extend the eligibility of the cap and rate increase to a larger group of homeowners, which has now been provided for. This Bill also seeks to address and simplify process matters like qualifying expenditure, increasing the time within which remediation work should be completed and following homeowners to seek technical reviews. I know many of these adjustments are essential interventions and I would like to place on record my appreciation for the collaboration we have had to this stage, with members of the housing committee assisting us in progressing this at speed as it is badly needed.

I want to ensure that homeowners receive the help they will need. Today’s Bill, I believe, is another key stage in further assisting homeowners. With the support of the Houses, I hope to have it enacted very shortly. I will respond to any specific questions and engage further on Committee Stage.

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for outlining the amendments. I also thank him for his commitment to this issue. He met those impacted at a very early stage, listened to their concerns, understood the need for flexibility in the legislation and very quickly sought to bring forward this amendment. We are not there yet - there are several Stages to go through - but clearly he has outlined the urgency of this legislation and the need for it and shown his commitment to it, so I thank him for that.

The Government is absolutely committed to ensuring that all such homeowners are financially assisted to remediate their homes to allow them to move on with their lives. The House will know that the scheme is currently open to applications in five counties, namely, Clare, Donegal, Limerick, Mayo and Sligo. When a local authority that is not currently designated under the scheme determines that homes within its area may have been damaged by defective concrete blocks, it can seek to have the scheme extended to include any such county or part of that county. Following reports received from the Housing Agency, Government approval will now be sought for the designation of the relevant parts of Fingal and Wexford local authority areas. This will allow homeowners in these counties affected by defective concrete blocks to apply to the grant scheme to receive the funding and the help they need to fix their homes and move on with their lives. I understand that further local authorities will also be designated under the scheme in the coming months. The Government stands ready to provide financial help wherever it is needed.

The latest data shows that 3,022 homeowners are at various stages of the scheme. Of those, 326 applicants have completed remediation works to their homes under the grant scheme, with a futher 1,057 applicants having notified their relevant local authority that they intend to commence works under the grant scheme. Since the enhanced scheme came into being in July 2023, the levels of funding have accelerated. More than €235 million has been spent on the scheme to date. As the scheme ramps up, further sufficient and additional funding will be provided as required. The overall cost of the scheme is expected to be in excess of €2.2 billion excluding inflation. This is a demand-led scheme and the Government remains 100% committed to funding the remediation of DCB homes as and when necessary. This includes reviewing the levels of funding required to meet ongoing constructions costs under the scheme, as evidenced by the centre piece provision in this Bill, namely, the retrospective application of scheme cap and grant rate increases announced late last year. We feel sure that this will help and compensate many homeowners who have seen costs rise during the time in question.

I also wish to acknowledge the role that designated local authorities and the Housing Agency play under the terms of the scheme. Designated local authorities are administrators of the scheme and the main contact for homeowners. The Housing Agency acts as agents on behalf of the designated local authorities. Through its framework of chartered engineers, it undertakes the assessment, survey, sampling, testing and categorisation of homes and thereafter determines the appropriate remediation option and grant amount to remediate the affected homes. Representatives from each of the designated local authorities also attend regular meetings of the implementation steering group. This group was established in 2023 and, along with the representatives from the designated local authorities and the Housing Agency, comprises officials from the Department and the homeowner liaison officer.

The homeowner liaison officer, Mr. John O’Connor, chair of the Housing Commission and the Pyrite Resolution Board, was appointed to act as liaison with homeowner representatives and elected representatives in counties affected by defective concrete blocks. The homeowner liaison officer works with representatives groups and my Department to ensure the concerns of key stakeholders are heard and dealt with.

As outlined earlier, the Bill contains a number of provisions. The main amendment will allow for retrospective grant payments. The others can be described as technical amendments to the Act and are proposed in order to enhance the efficient and fair operation of the grant scheme. These technical amendments include measures such as: a review of determined options for certain homeowners; increasing the time within which remediation works should be completed; allowing the opportunity, subject to certain conditions, to either a person who was married to, a civil partner of, or cohabiting with a relevant owner prior to the commencement the Act, to now become a relevant owner; and the facilitation of ancillary grants to applicants who have reached the grant scheme cap.

The programme for Government commits to undertaking the planned review of the scheme. This refers to the fact that the primary legislation mandates the commencement of a review of the scheme within three years of the Act coming into operation. In addition to this, a review of the operation of the Act is required within three months of the completion of any review of I.S. 465:2018, the national standard that underpins the current grant scheme. As Ireland's official standards body, the National Standards Authority of Ireland has been tasked with the review of this standard and I understand this review is due to conclude in quarter 1 of 2026 with the publication of the revised standard. This will start the process for a requirement to review the Act that the Department stands ready to action. We will continue to work with representatives from all parties to ensure impacted homeowners are heard and listened to and that the scheme reflects their needs.

Deputies are keenly aware of the issues of defective concrete blocks. We are committed to ensuring this scheme works for homeowners and I think they will agree that this Bill contains a number of fundamental and important legislative measures, aimed at further assisting impacted homeowners. I thank the members of the Oireachtas housing committee for assisting us in progressing this matter. This collaboration is appreciated and we hope to get this legislation passed as soon as possible. We will continue to work closely with all Members of the Oireachtas, and listen carefully to their views as we put in place regulations and guidance to ensure the scheme can address the real concerns of homeowners.

As the Minister said, Committee Stage will be a good opportunity for questions and answers and to tease out a lot of the proposed amendments. I commend this legislation to the Dáil.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State. We will begin now with Deputy Mac Lochlainn who is sharing time.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is a long, long time coming. As we know, the 2022 legislation was rammed through the Dáil. I will never forget it. The homeowners who were up in the Public Gallery were absolutely traumatised and were banging on the screens. I will never forget the look on their faces outside afterwards. They were absolutely betrayed. They had engaged honourably with Government and they were betrayed by a scheme that condemned our people in Donegal and the west of Ireland to be second-class citizens. It is absolutely shameful that we have victims of the scandals of defective concrete products all across Ireland, from east to west and north to south, and that there is first-class citizenship and there is second-class citizenship. If you are in Dublin and Leinster, the pyrite remediation scheme that has helped almost 3,000 families is genuinely 100% redress, and rightly so.

They have a scheme that is delivered directly by the State. They do not negotiate with builders and developers over prices. They do not have to navigate all the paperwork and project management. They get 100% redress delivered by the State. We have said again and again that no matter where you live in Ireland, you were utterly failed and you must get 100% redress.

Can the Minister imagine a scenario where two people go into a shop and one buys a small TV while the other buys a big TV? These TVs do not work. They are utterly faulty and the shop owner and the State say, "We're sorry. We don't provide any protection for the person who bought the bigger TV. It's about the cost. If they bought the small TV, we can afford to compensate them but if it was the bigger TV, they get some of the compensation but not the full compensation."

Here is the reality in the west of Ireland from Donegal to Mayo right down to Limerick and Clare. People are being left behind. They have to fill huge gaps with money. I will tell the story again of the family I met on their site. They were traumatised; their house had been demolished. They downsized their house under the new plan, by the way. They had a mortgage of about €900 per month with six years left. In order to rebuild their lives with the Government scheme, they will have a mortgage that is double that at €1,800 and which has 21 years left. That is what 100% redress looks like in Donegal and the west of Ireland. There is a small number of families this scheme can work for; maybe they have family in the building game or can access €50,000 or €60,000. We have a situation where people are living in shocking conditions but cannot afford to go through the scheme, so they are just left behind - second-class citizenship.

The Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland was tasked with looking at the costings in 2023. In March 2024, the society reported to Government. The Minister had the flexibility in the legislation to increase the cap by 10% and the caps on the square meterage. The Minister did that in or around October 2024 and, at the same time, promised that those already going through the scheme would be able to avail of the increased cap. That was a huge thing because we are talking about tens of thousands of euro. That is huge in people's lives. Over a year later, we finally have this amendment. It could have been done long ago. It could have been done within hours, with the political will. This is incrementalist. This is second-class citizenship, folks.

The Minister knows it is wrong. I have responses from Ministers, including the Minister, Deputy Browne, and his predecessor saying out loud that it is about money. If people live in houses, which have to be demolished and rebuilt, it is too much money and the Government will not give them 100% redress. It said it never actually called it "redress". Minister after Minister and Department official after Department official has come before committees and come into this Dáil and called it 100% redress on the record of these Houses. Then, in a response to a parliamentary question, it is, "No, actually, it's our scheme of last recourse. We're doing you a great favour." This is second-class citizenship.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will continue for one more minute with the forbearance of my colleague.

What is the issue with these incrementalist amendments? The issue is the Government is still excluding people. It put a date of March 2029. It was bad enough the Government took over a year but now it is excluding dozens of families. It is so cruel. They will be out tens of thousands of euro. Why did the Government put the date of 29 March 2024 to coincide with the publication of the SCSI report? That does not stand up because that report would have looked at costings into 2023. I ask the Minister not to be cruel and not to exclude dozens of families who are desperately waiting on this money. They are panicking that this will not be conceded by the Minister. Please concede our point. We will, of course, put in amendments.

Finally, there is the semi-detached issue. For a holiday home owner, for someone who owns more than one rental property and for most people who cannot afford to go through the scheme, that semi-detached building will still stand. They will still be knocking down semi-detached buildings. This is madness. Any builder or engineer would ask what the Minister is playing at here.

I ask the Minister to please listen to those of us who are on the ground in the west of Ireland and to do what is right and fair. He knows this is wrong. I ask him to please stop it, confront his officials and do what is right.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As my colleague, Deputy Mac Lochlainn, said, this amendment is long overdue. It is symptomatic of the Government. It has been two years since it was asked to look at the costs and it is a year on from the general election when it said it was going to bring it in. We are taking this legislation now, legislation that was published at 10 o'clock this morning. This shows how much the Government cares about people in my constituency, in Mayo and in other areas that have defective blocks. The type of approach the Government has taken to this legislation is absolutely appalling, as is the length of time it has taken. It is cruel, heartless, brutal, ruthless, cold-hearted, detached and indifferent. These are words that families who live in houses with defective blocks have used to describe to me the approach of this Government. I agree 100% with them because what the Government is doing is cruel. There is no defence anymore in terms of the Government saying it does not know what the issues are. People's houses are crumbling down around them. The Government brought in a scheme it pretended was 100% redress. All it was was pretence, because there would be no issues today if we had a 100% redress scheme. The Government would not be playing around with a 10% increase in allowances and grants and backdating it to a certain date, with cut-off points that are absolutely cruel, heartless, cold, indifferent, detached and everything those families in County Donegal said to me about this Government.

It is appalling what is happening. People are stuck in a crisis and in absolute misery not of their own making. They have turned to the Government. They have marched in the streets. As Deputy Mac Lochlainn said, they have filled the Gallery here pleading and begging that their elected representatives would hear them, step up and make sure they had equality. That is what they want. They want equality and not something new, different or more than anybody else. They want the same scheme other people in the east of this country were able to get, where their houses were fixed and where 100% redress was provided. The Government has brought forward a small increase in relation to the grants but costs have already overtaken that increase and it has only been applied to works carried out from March 2024. This means people are still going to be left behind.

The promise the Government made that earlier movers would not be penalised is one it has fairly broken in this legislation because it is penalising early movers. It is breaking its promise and its commitment. Again, this scheme is so deeply flawed that what we need is not tinkering with it but a proper scheme. We need a scheme that delivers 100% redress, one not based on laptop studies but on the proper, up-to-date science that actually deals with the issue going on in people's homes. We need a scheme that not just deals with people's homes but one that deals with the 12 schools in Donegal that have defective blocks-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We need a scheme that deals with the childcare centres our children are in that are falling down. We need a scheme for our community buildings that are falling down in Donegal and elsewhere. The Government needs to get with it because what it is doing is cruel, vindictive, callous, cold-hearted and indifferent. The people have demanded what they have got so far from the Government. They have wrenched every little bit and every little support from the Government. They are going to continue and we in Sinn Féin are going to stand with them shoulder to shoulder until we get 100% redress because they deserve nothing less.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot believe I am reading this legislation. I have waited every week for it since March. It could have been done in April, May, June, July, August, September, October or November. Here we are now in December and this is what the Government gives us? Is the Government going to take all the calls from people in County Mayo tonight when they look at this legislation and see that 29 March is an arbitrary cut-off date? The Government cannot do this. We will obviously be putting in amendments to this legislation.

Minister after Minister and official after official swore nobody would be disadvantaged by the point at which they went into this scheme. Now, this turns out to be blatantly false. I have been reassuring homeowners. There has been talk of cohorts here. I have been reassuring families that the legislation will come.

The Minister could have introduced this legislation as an inconsequential amendment to the emergency planning Bill. I told the Minister and the Tánaiste in this Chamber. I have been telling them: "Do not worry; nobody will be left behind." Now the Minister comes and says 29 March is cut-off day. I am speaking to the Minister and the officials as well: for heaven's sake, please correct that. I am very conscious that this is not going to reach Committee Stage for another week and that families tonight are going to be in the same excruciating torture they have been in for months. The Minister has to change it. It is wholly unacceptable.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not know who thought it was acceptable, or who thought it was acceptable for the Minister to go back on his word. It is certainly not acceptable to me or to homeowners in Mayo.

I also wish to raise retrospective payments. Time and time again, I have asked him to cover houses that people had to build before the scheme in. They have to be covered. There are gaps that people are trying to deal with. Let us take Páirc na Coille in Westport. There is €50,000 of a gap. How in the name of God does the Minister expect people to find €50,000? They cannot find it. It is just not there. Now I have to go back and tell some of them tonight: "Actually you are not included in this. He has excluded you." Jesus, I do not know what to say to the Minister at this stage. He says he stands ready to provide financial help. If this is what he stands ready to do, it is absolutely disgraceful.

I want to take another matter up with him How does it take more than eight or nine months to get the results of tests that are done? I have people waiting since early this year to get the results back from the tests so they could get on with their work. Can the Minister give me an explanation before we leave the Chamber tonight as to why the tests take this long? Is he sending them to Mars? It is taking eight or nine months to get the results of the tests back. I am not an engineer but I can tell going into a house, because I have been in so many houses that are falling down, that somebody has pyrite. There is pyrite in the defective blocks in Mayo. It takes eight or nine months to get the results of tests back. Where is the scheme for the social houses? The Minister said the Government is putting away money for a rainy day. Is it not brilliant? What about the social houses in Mayo and other houses where the rain is coming in through the ceiling and rats and mice are coming through the gaps in the wall? Jesus, the Minister says that he is listening and it is so obvious that he is not hearing a word of what people are saying. We keep giving him the solutions and telling him what needs to be done but he still refuses to listen.

I have to bring up with the Minister the current inspection of the quarries. There is a need to appoint a geologist to make sure the aggregate coming out of the quarries is fit for purpose now.

Charles Ward (Donegal, 100% Redress Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not confident in what is coming out and that the inspection regimes are good enough. The people in Mayo, because they have been let down time and time again, do not have confidence in that either.

The Minister referred to alternative suitable accommodation. Deputy Pearse Doherty presented the Minister with a solution to it last week. Again, it was refused by the new the all-singing, all-dancing Minister for Finance. Again, when a solution was presented to him, the Minister for housing turned his back.

There need to be changes here before next week, otherwise he must go down, face the people in Mayo and tell them.

Donna McGettigan (Clare, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We were told time and time again that this is a 100% redress scheme but it is not. What we see before us again today is evidence of that. The scheme is not fit for purpose and the evidence is there for anyone to look at. Behind every fact, figure and departmental line lies a human story of families who suffer every day. They are families who wonder every time Met Éireann issues a warning if this is the day their house comes down.

Do Government Members really believe that €150,000 is enough to rebuild a home in rural Ireland, or in Clare? This is what the Government has decided people will get and that is before demolition, engineers and every other cost of this comes out of that inadequate scheme. Ordinary people who did nothing wrong are now being forced to borrow tens of thousands of euro just to make up for this Government's failed scheme.

These families never asked for this. They believed they were living in their dream homes, building dreams and memories but they are now living in nightmares. They were directly promised that no homeowner would be disadvantaged when transitioning from the initial scheme, but there are now at least 25 families in Clare already locked out of that increased grant. They are locked out by nothing but an arbitrary date, a date that creates inequity, division and despair. What about those in social housing who are expected to pay rent for houses crumbling down around them? People have faced barrier after barrier and all of it has been placed there by this Government. This is not 100% redress. The Government got this wrong and needs to fix it. All homeowners must be treated equally, with no arbitrary dates, no discrimination and no family left behind. 100% redress must mean 100% redress. We do not need slogans or spin, but real support. The people of Clare and other areas deserve fairness, not excuses. It is time for the Government to face reality and deliver a scheme that homeowners were promised and deserve.

Conor Sheehan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This amending Bill is a tweak to a scheme that does not work. The scheme does not work because it is not an end-to-end redress scheme like the pyrite scheme that people on the east coast of the country have been able to avail of quite successfully for a number of years now. Recently, myself and Senator Nessa Cosgrove visited Donegal. We went to Letterkenny and met with Deputy Charles Ward and some of his councillors. We saw the scale of the human devastation. I will never forget the people I met or the smell in some of their homes of sheer damp. I will never forget people telling me they are terrified of the roof falling down on their house because the walls are crumbling and cannot hold up the roof. What is being proposed here is an improvement on the original scheme but it is nowhere near enough. People right down the west coast as far as Limerick bought and paid for their homes. They scrimped and saved and worked as hard as they could. Now in many cases they effectively have to pay twice for those homes.

It is very disrespectful to publish the Bill only a few short hours before the debate. I know the housing committee waived pre-legislative scrutiny on this weeks ago to ensure that it could be done as soon as possible. When we are talking about the specifics, what is being proposed in respect of semi-detached dwellings does not go anywhere near far enough. I have seen ludicrous situations, including one in my own constituency of Limerick, where one home from a pair of semi-detached houses was demolished as defective while the other was left standing with very obvious defects and obvious damage done to it during the process. Particularly in respect of Limerick, we are at the tip of the iceberg. There are many people in Limerick who do not even know they are living in defective homes. There is a need to consider this scheme on a national and not a county-by-county basis. This is yet another sticking plaster over a gaping wound. People have been campaigning for 15 years for redress for their defective homes. Seven years after the Government first came forward with the fundamentals of a scheme in 2018, only a couple of hundred homes have been fixed. The scheme has not worked because it has been designed as a grant scheme and not as an end-to-end scheme.

The Minister is making the same mistake, unfortunately, in relation to the legislation around defective apartments. These poor traumatised people are expected, essentially, to project-manage an entire process themselves with little help or little assistance. Even the cost of getting an initial assessment - the testing and the reports - quickly runs to thousands of euro. My concern is that in trying to address this crisis, the Minister is not actually addressing it in the whole as the humanitarian disaster it is. He is sort of going around the place firefighting. The Minister's visit to County Donegal earlier this year was very welcome because his predecessor refused to do so, but what the Minister is proposing here is not enough because the scheme by its very premise is flawed.

We finally have the so-called emergency legislation to lift the cap, which was promised over a year ago, but we need to see the scientific underpinning of the scheme updated. Pyrrhotite and framboidal pyrite are the cause of concrete cracking and crumbling. The review into IS 465 needs to be published and that is not due until quarter 1 of 2026. The scientific underpinning of the scheme is outdated and flawed because it assesses superficial damage and not structural stability. We need an interim measure to stop people continuing to get wrong remediation measures. For example, options 2 to 5 under this scheme essentially involve leaving defective concrete somewhere within a building. The Government is going to have to come back to that in years to come, and that is going to cost the State and the taxpayer more money. People have huge difficulties in insuring and mortgaging these properties. This is not a long-term solution, and these homes will continue to deteriorate. Option 1, full demolition and reconstruction, is the only viable option. It should not be up to homeowners to determine whether they should replace their foundations. That is why we need an end-to-end scheme. At the bare minimum, we need to make sure we test the foundations on every single home on this scheme.

I welcome the fact that parts of Fingal will be included in the revised scheme because my colleague, Deputy Robert O'Donoghue, has been campaigning and working with affected families for years. The request first went in from Fingal County Council to the Housing Agency in September 2023. The testing was done in December 2023. It really should not take this long because if we factor in the impact of the concrete block levy and the increased cost of construction, hardworking families are effectively being doubly penalised. The issue is that this is actually not fundamentally 100% redress. For example, there are issues with people downsizing. They will only be paid for the square metres they rebuild, irrespective of what is actually left on their mortgage.

Before I conclude this evening, I want to emphasise that not one single quarry has been adequately held to account for the defective products they sold. Many of these queries are still selling defective concrete blocks. Government inspectors, not quarry owners or employees, must select material for inspection because otherwise we have no real way of preventing this. We need an end-to-end scheme. We essentially need mark 2 of the pyrite remediation scheme that gives people the ideal model to allow them to rebuild their lives. Along with my colleagues across the Opposition, I will be proposing some amendments to this Bill because I especially think, going back to what other speakers said earlier, that the arbitrary deadline of 29 March needs to be looked at again.

There is nothing in it on expenses incurred in 2023. I urge the Minister to look at this again. While I welcome the fact he is tweaking the scheme, I do not accept fundamentally that the scheme is fit for purpose. It is designed as a grant scheme when it should be an end-to end scheme. Unfortunately the Government is insistent on doing the same thing with the defective apartments.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in the debate. I will refer to some of the positives in the amendment to the defective blocks legislation. For example, it is an opportunity for retrospective payments to be made to homeowners who previously hit the scheme cap. This is the extra 10% in most cases. I agree with many of the contributors that the date of 29 March 2024 is very much arbitrary and I request the Minister to look at it. If it were to be changed, it would not be that much more costly. Not too many houses are affected but each and every one is important. I ask the Minister to have a look at this between now and Committee Stage.

Recently I took the opportunity to visit all of the schemes in Letterkenny that are affected. It reminded me of a visit to New Orleans for St. Patrick's Day in 2006. I toured the city and saw the devastation there. The only difference was that after Hurricane Katrina the houses were not left standing. Those houses were totally demolished whereas in Donegal the houses are not demolished but they are crumbling. Through time, unless something is done, many of these houses will be somewhat similar to what I saw in the United States many years ago. When I left there I remember saying to those who accompanied me that it was not about bricks and mortar; it was much more than that. It was much more profound as it affected families, relationships, homeowners, mental and physical health and well-being. We do not know what happens in houses when families go inside the door but I have no doubt this issue is affecting family relationships and children. I know of a number of individuals who wanted to send their children to college but the children said to their parents that they could not afford to do so and that they would take time out to work. This is the effect it is having on all of these families in Donegal.

I welcome the new provisions to support homeowners who exceeded the former scheme limit and have incurred qualifying expenditure since 29 March 2024. I ask the Minister to have a look at this rather than having it as an arbitrary date.

Issuing homeowners with a non-demolition option, which, in plain language, is with regard to the outer leaf, makes no sense. The concrete blocks in the outer leaf being affected, while the blocks in the inner leaf were not, does not make sense. Most of these people are now awaiting the amendment to SI 465. After my visit to parts of Donegal last week, I took the opportunity to write to the chief executive of the NSAI to ask when the new SI 465 is scheduled to be published. I also asked whether there was a draft or a summary. Of course, I got a reply this afternoon to say it was still working through the hundreds of proposals it has, and that it would be sometime next year I heard the Minister say earlier, which I welcome, that it will be available in the first quarter of 2026, and I hope it is sooner rather than later. The scheme would not make sense for most of those approved for the outer leaf because in years to come they will be back again. Not only would they then have to replace the outer leaf to get into the inner leaf, but it would cause substantial costs for them.

I welcome the recommendation regarding side by side. Many families whose houses were adapted to accommodate adults or children with special needs had to put specialised equipment into them. It made sense to build side by side and I am pleased the Minister will bring forward amendments on Committee Stage to accommodate those same people. The 65 weeks to complete remediation works from the date of commencement never made much sense, as well as the requirement to apply 12 weeks in advance for an extension. Now, that has gone to 130 weeks. The big problem in my county, as I am sure it is elsewhere, is that it is impossible to get contractors to do the work. As soon as one is approved, it can take a long time because many of our people have emigrated, largely to Australia and many places. We should be trying to attract those people back to participate in the development of these houses that will be knocked and rebuilt.

I want to take this opportunity to compliment the staff of Donegal County Council who are administrating this scheme. They are on the front line and are snowed under. I am also pleased funding is being provided to employ additional staff. I hope that can happen sooner rather than later to ensure the process is as streamlined as possible between the Department and Donegal County Council, with a view to getting families the additional other retrospective payment as soon as possible.

Others referred to the buildings not included in this scheme. It is heartbreaking to meet people who are in apartments who are not covered. There are also several schools in the county that are affected. There are community centres, farm buildings and local authority houses affected. I understand there are about 2,000 local authority houses affected in Donegal and they are not in the scheme. Those are all the additionals. Whether this happens next week or before Christmas, including local authority houses has to be considered. Of course, there are also childcare facilities, and mention was made of the delay in carrying out the testing. In terms of these are delays, it should not take eight or nine months to carry out tests and report back.

Furthermore, I refer to anyone wanting to buy a house under the tenant purchase scheme, which was one of the best schemes ever introduced. I was here at the time, back in 1987. Many people bought their houses at a reasonable cost but it is much different since that scheme was amended. If those houses are being purchased now, it will take a long time to have the test carried out which adds further to delays.

The Minister has guaranteed he will introduce an amendment for the side by side and there will be support across the House for that. It would assist vulnerable families who face challenges in finding suitable alternate accommodation when their homes are being remedied. Builders will have to approve compliance before homes can be occupied to ensure safer houses for families. The new process will regulate these works without proper notification while expanded enforcement powers give authorities more flexibility to resolve issues fairly. As regards the semi-detached houses, I will await welcoming all that until I have further detail - that is, with adjoining or adjacent dwellings included in remediation.

All in all, it is a step forward. We have been waiting on this for a considerable time. There are many families who, immediately when they read the press release which was issued by the Minister, will say, "We are not included in that."

Those people have to be included. It is no fault of their own that they have purchased defective concrete blocks, and all of that has to be taken into consideration. I welcome the fact it is the Minister's intention to have the legislation through the House before Christmas because people have waited long enough. It is incumbent on us to ensure that the Bill goes through the House as quickly as possible. While I welcome some aspects of the Bill, I still have reservations about all of the other types of buildings that are not included and must be included, because this is not going to go away. I repeat my concern for all those families who are suffering mental and physical health issues as a result of the situation they have found themselves in, which is not of their doing.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have not spoken on this issue before but I have listened to so many debates on it over the period of time. It struck me today when I was looking at the update to the Bill and the background to it. It reminds me of when we had issues with pyrite in my constituency. It was one of the first areas where it was discovered that pyrite was affecting homes. I know it is a completely different defect that they had, but they went through some really difficult times. I know some of the families in Dublin West who were utterly distressed over the issue of pyrite and how it was going to be remedied and how they were going to get support. We still have other, different defects in apartment blocks in Dublin West and across the country that are down to very poor building construction and very poor oversight by local authorities and the Government. It was a free for all that allowed developers and builders to pretty much do what they wanted, with all of the self-regulation. We know the reasons we have got to where we are.

I know people in Donegal and I have seen some of the ways this has affected people. I was explaining this to someone the other day. Even in my constituency to this day, I have met a number of families in a brand new estate where they feel that there are building defects or there are issues within their development. Seventy-three families will be moved out of these brand new houses they moved into less than six months ago. They have paid upwards of €500,000 for these houses. They are being remediated but we are still dealing with building defects. I find it incredible that in this day and age these issues are ongoing. I was explaining the pyrite and mica issue to them and they just could not believe that this was happening in this day and age and that these issues, which go back years, have still not been resolved. Even with all of the issues that we are talking about here in relation to this Bill, we still do not have 100% redress. It is still the case that families that cannot rest their heads on a pillow tonight and say it has been sorted. Financial costs have been imposed on these families, as has been said, through absolutely no fault of their own. This was nothing to do with them. They did everything in good faith. They did what they were supposed to do and yet they are still left in this situation where they do not have 100% redress.

I have listened to the TDs from Donegal, such as Pearse and Pádraig. I just cannot believe that we are still here and that those people cannot look forward to Christmas knowing that this has been sorted out. I appeal to the Minister on a human level to make sure that this is dealt with and that these people get what they deserve, which are the homes they paid for.

Rory Hearne (Dublin North-West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is deeply disappointing that the Bill was just published today. That did not give us sufficient time to go through it. While we did go through it in the housing committee, I do not think it is good practice to issue legislation on the day it is to be debated in the Dáil. I ask the Minister to reconsider how legislation is put through in the future. It is not sufficient time for us to go through it. While we want to progress legislation and solutions for people, in particular in situations like this where people are living in life-or-death situations, we really need to respect the process, the committee and us as elected representatives. I want to express my disappointment and ask the Minister to consider how legislation is brought through such that sufficient time is given.

As I have said previously in the Dáil, ultimately it is those who are affected by and living through this who need to be listened to. Deputy Ward has raised this issue and we have listened to people in the audiovisual room who are living through this. I have also heard accounts through my office. It is quite clear that as currently constructed, the proposals to deal with this are not adequate. They are not adequate in providing the redress that people need, both financially and in terms of the process itself. There are still substantial issues.

In particular, I want to raise the issue of what is the fundamental problem. We heard a very good presentation on the issue of pyrrhotite. The assumption or theory was that freeze thaw from mica was causing the problems in the housing, whereas it is actually caused by an internal sulfate attack by pyrrhotite. As was pointed out, this is very important because if we do not have the proper identification of what is causing the problem, we will not be able to solve it. Importantly, we will not enable those who are living in the homes to solve it. The concern is that this will be a part solution and that really we are burying - literally - the problem, which is going to emerge in years to come. It is papering over the cracks rather than fundamentally addressing the structural issue that is making the houses crumble and fall apart. It is not the freeze thaw from mica, as most people believe, but something else going on. It has been identified that the guidelines under the NSAI standards have not been updated to acknowledge this and that the scheme itself does not acknowledge this. Will the Minister come back on this? It is fundamental to how this issue is going to be genuinely addressed.

The other issue I want to talk about is the mental health impact of this crisis on people who are living through it. It is something I have spoken about before in relation to housing on a broader level. People in insecure and substandard homes are living through chronic stress. It is similar to, and in many ways significantly heightened by, living in a home affected by defective concrete. I would encourage the Minister to read an academic paper on this written by Oisin Keenan, Jamie Murphy, Paul Dunlop, Eileen Doherty, Rachel McHugh and Karen Kirby. It highlights that the use of defective concrete in the construction of homes has caused not only widespread property deterioration and economic shock but also psychological distress for thousands of families.

This is a recently published research paper. It points out that no actual research has been undertaken into the prevalence of mental health conditions affecting those who are living with defective concrete crises. The authors wanted to understand the prevalence of depression, anxiety, traumatic stress and, indeed, suicidal ideation among a sample of the population. The findings are stark and point to the need for the redress scheme to be done properly to ensure those affected have supports. In a sample of 393 adults, which is a large sample, the authors found in respect of the impact that 30% of people had severe depression and that 26% had severe anxiety. Suicidal ideation experienced after a property was affected by defective concrete was present in over one third of the sample, 35%. Adjusting for previous trauma history, they found that living with defective concrete accentuates and exacerbates these mental health issues, including severe anxiety, suicidal ideation and depression. These are very serious conditions and issues that are affecting people. We must implement policies to ensure mitigation as soon as possible, that we give proper 100% redress and that we do not leave people living in such psychological distress.

Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the time to speak to this Bill, but I have to share the frustration that many others have expressed at how this has been handled and the fact we have only been able to access the Bill in the past number of hours. The Chief Whip addressed the issue on the Order of Business, but it will have a knock-on effect. She said we will have more time to debate the issue next week, but as somebody who attends the Business Committee many weeks, as deputy Whip of my own party, I know there is a queue of things we are all trying to get to talk about on the floor of the Dáil.

I want to touch on a few key points about the March 2024 cut-off date, the downgraded homeowners, the remediation decisions based on IS 465 and the human rights impact. I want to give particular thanks to both Ms Marti McElhinney and Dr. Áine Sperrin, who both spoke to my office on the issue today and helped to inform my contribution.

The people affected by defective concrete blocks have waited years for help. Today's rushed introduction of documentation is really problematic. In that context, the details of the changes unveiled at the eleventh hour represent the only urgency that is being shown in this process, which is the scrutiny of what is being put forward. It is absolutely vital to the families and communities affected by defective concrete blocks that we do this right and delayed publication, which impacts our ability to scrutinise the Minister's proposal, only undermines trust in a system that has already failed, and continues to fail, these people.

This Bill leaves significant gaps for the affected families. The March 2024 cut-off date will continue to leave some homeowners behind. It does not fill me with confidence in a context where we are supposed to be righting a wrong that is arguably at least partially the State's wrong. The cut-off date represents an arbitrary line between those who do qualify and those who do not. This is despite the reassurances given to these very people that they would not face this kind of penalty. I cannot understand why this Department and Minister are insisting on a cut-off date that guarantees that this matter will not be fixed and will not be made right by the State.

I also want to touch on the issue I mentioned of downgraded homeowners. Under this Bill, particularly section 15, we are still faced with the issue of homeowners trapped in a flawed process whereby the chartered engineers they must hire to assess their homes conclude that their homes require demolition, only for the Housing Agency to overturn those decisions and decide, without ever seeing a house, that it does not need to be demolished. Appeals that were lodged over the past two years are coming back, one by one, overruling those downgrades. Why are we tinkering around the edges of this issue and forcing these families to wait even longer when we know what needs to be addressed urgently?

Many people in the Chamber have spoken about the human rights impact. We are seeing a clear breach of the public sector equality and human rights duty because people in similar situations are being treated differently by public bodies. We are seeing this inequality continue to intensify rather than be addressed. Time and again, the State expects families affected by defective concrete blocks all across the west of Ireland to navigate a complex, piecemeal and, at times, nonsensical system to get some form of redress. They are being treated differently than those in the Leinster schemes. Failing to uphold the human rights of these families costs them not just their dignity but also the rights to a home, to be treated with respect, to privacy and to health. The impact of these wrongs will be felt by this State for years as we bear the cost of fixing not only the original wrongs but the results of a bungled scheme that puts these families through more hardship and harm.

I have a lot of connections with Donegal and visit it regularly, which is why I have chosen to speak on the issue for a second time. I speak to people who are affected by this issue and it has affected their lives so deeply. We need to take a minute to ensure we are all listening to the people whose lives are being so affected by this issue.

Once again, I commend Deputy Charles Ward on his continuing and persistent work. I have said before that it must feel like he is shouting into a void because of the slow way things are being addressed.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire agus an Roinn as ucht an Bhille seo a fhoilsiú.

I welcome the publication of the Bill. I agree with everyone else. Deputy Conway-Walsh and I have worked with families on this issue. It has caused huge distress, and that does not only apply in the past tense because it is still causing massive distress. This process is being accentuated. I want to make a number of suggestions to follow up on conversations I have had with the Minister around this issue.

First is the question of how. How did all this happen? That is being forgotten. We need to provide answers to people as to how this happened, and as to how it happened in such a random manner for many people. A guarantee was given that there would be an inquiry into all of this so we can learn and do not put future families through this process. It is important that we begin that process and stand up that inquiry.

I welcome the changes proposed in the ministerial amendment in relation to semi-detached houses. The position until now has been that where there are two owners of houses attached to one another, one might be approved whereas the person in the next house might not be approved. The person who is approved might proceed with construction and actually lose space in their existing house so as not to affect the house that was not proceeding. It made no sense that two houses that were inevitably going to proceed at some stage and would have to be reconstructed if they had pyrite were going to be done separately under two separate systems. This was also an extra expense, not just on the families but also on the State. I welcome the fact that common sense has prevailed. I would ask for that measure to be introduced without delay and without extra regulation tying it up.

I welcome the amendment in relation to adjacent dwellings. This has been a major bugbear in respect of the scheme to date. I also welcome the fact ancillary grants are being taken outside of the cap.

We need a one-stop shop to manage all of this. The processes to manage separately the defective concrete blocks, DCB, grant and the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, grant are putting people through too much stress. I put on record my thanks - I know Deputy Conway-Walsh, as somebody who works on this every day, will agree - to Mayo County Council and, in particular, to Ms Clodagh Gleeson, an official in Mayo County Council who is an example to every single public and civil servant in this country as to how to get people through the most extraordinary and difficult of situations, how to show empathy and understanding, and to keep in touch with people even when dealing with a scheme that may be difficult. I commend her approach and her empathy for families.

The appeals process is clearly not working. Far greater clarity needs to be brought to that process. People stuck in the process are not being given the information as to where it is at, which adds to the sense of stress and distress. It needlessly adds to the difficult challenges that are being faced. I ask that resources be put in to find the communication that is necessary in order to give people some sort of sense of where they are at.

It is important we get the Bill passed quickly. Some people are waiting for payments and the Minster is aware of concerns around that. However, we need to know why and we still really have not progressed that. How is it that one house has it and the neighbouring house can have been constructed at a relatively similar time and not have any situation or pyrite? We need to try to get an understanding of that because if we do not, we will be here again in two, three, four, 20, 25 or 30 years looking at a similar scandal. That is if people are not held to account for what homeowners have been put through, the distress, including mental distress. We cannot allow it to happen again for the quality of our building standards and confidence in them. We just simply cannot allow it to happen again and allow people to get away with it in the way they seem to have to date.

Charles Ward (Donegal, 100% Redress Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I stand today not only as a TD, but as someone who is directly affected by this. This is a Government-created situation. It happened because of a lack of checks on quarries. If this had been done properly, we would not be facing this situation. I speak with the anger of a father who has watched his home crumble. I speak with the frustration of the people who contact me every day and who cannot take one more sleepless night worrying whether the Bison slab over their heads will come down and injure or kill their children. This is happening. Every day we are contacted.

I acknowledge that there is small progress in this Bill, but I cannot pretend it is nearly enough. Progress is limited. Some families will finally receive a retrospective payment. I recognise that and it is needed, but let us be honest; it is a drop in the ocean in terms of what we need. This amendment Bill does not fix the scheme. It does not address the most dangerous failures. It does not protect the most vulnerable. It does not stop the trauma or injustice. A few administrative tweaks cannot disguise the fact the scheme is fundamentally broken. The State allowed defective material to enter the market and families are paying the price.

Applications are not progress. They are evidence of a crisis. The Government boasts about 3,000 applications as though it were proof of success, but proof it is not. People are afraid to apply to the scheme because they simply cannot afford it. Their homes are falling apart. They are terrified because they are currently out of options. Applications do not equal safe homes, structural repairs or justice. The truth is that the scheme is dysfunctional. Even those who are accepted onto it are stuck with hundreds of thousands of euro of debt. The reality on the ground is unsafe homes and unsafe lives. Hundreds of families live in homes in which the external leaf has collapsed. They are told, unbelievably, that this is safe. They sleep under Bison slabs, as I said earlier, and watch as the cracks appear, get bigger and the wall that was once there turns into powder. This is not success; this is neglect.

Partial remediation is a complete failure and cannot be considered. Government TDs repeatedly described this as the biggest scheme in the history of the State, but just over 200 applicants have completed it and most of them got partial remediation and will have to be revisited in the future at great expense to the Exchequer. Partial remediation is fiscally irresponsible. It is a political cover-up. The State knows this and continues it anyway. This is not redress. It is as simple as that. It is a grant scheme. Let us call it what it is, a grant scheme. It is not 100% redress. We can call a grant full expenditure coverage, but if caps, exclusions, callbacks and hidden costs leave families tens of thousands of euro in debt, it is not redress. Vulnerable families and people are forced to become project managers, find contractors, navigate the costs and engineering disputes and manage dangerous sites. It is simply not redress.

Science has moved on, but the scheme has not. The Government continues to hide behind IS 465, a standard that does not reflect scientific consensus. It misidentifies the root cause of the damage and leads engineers to recommend partial remediation, which we will have to come back to at a later date. The Geological Survey of Ireland has confirmed the crisis is primarily due to internal sulfate attack, not mica. Mica is not the issue here, but the State continues to train engineers on a outdated standard. Even Engineers Ireland, through its director general, told an Oireachtas committee that IS 465 is simply not fit for purpose. The Housing Agency still instructs engineers to follow it. This is not a mistake; this is a choice to ignore the science because acknowledging it would force the Government to admit the truth, which is that the only thing we can get out of this is full demolition. That is what is required when an iron sulfate attack is happening in a building. It is a terminal decline in a building. The technical review is simply a farce. The Government tells families who have been wrongly assigned partial remediation that they can request a technical review. It is a bad joke. It is an insult. It is like sending a surgeon to perform heart surgery with a textbook from the 1970s, him botching the operation and then telling the patient to apply for a technical review. It is crazy stuff. The burden is again entirely on the homeowner, who must prove the State was wrong and again wait months or years. The scheme is self-protective, but not homeowner-protective. The appeals system is independent in name only. The Government claims the appeals panel is independent but section 39(10)(b) of the Act states:

the Appeal Board shall—

[...]

(i) direct ... the Housing Agency ... to reconsider its decision ..., or

(ii) replace the decision [itself]

That does not sound like independence to me. In reality, the board never replaces the decision. Every appeal is pushed straight back to the Housing Agency, the same flawed logic appears again and homeowners wait months and years for the same outcome. This is not independence; this is a closed loop designed to protect the agency from accountability.

Let me say this clearly: when I raised concerns, the chair of the Housing Agency wrote to me and accused me of interference. For doing my job by representing my constituents, I was interfering - No. A more absurd, dysfunctional system could not be designed and, as I have said previously, the human costs of this scheme have been proven by research. It is not absurd. It is not decisions. These decisions are destroying lives. Research by Karen Kirby and Oisin Keenan of Ulster University into cases of structural collapses, uncertainty and prolonged displacement shows higher rates of depression in families, chronic anxiety, inability to maintain one's life and go to work, increased risk of suicide, severe emotional harm to children and long-term PTSD-type symptoms.

A constituent told me recently:

Every time the wind shakes the house, my heart stops. I lie awake wondering if tonight is the night the walls will come down. I do not feel safe. I feel unsafe to close my eyes. Every time I close my eyes and the wind hits against the house, I am worried that the house will come down. I look across at my children and I do not know what to do.

I get these kinds of messages every day, as do my colleagues. We all can understand what is going on.

Pre-legislative scrutiny was waived for a reason. It exists to prevent bad law, force transparency, ensure accountability and allow TDs, especially Opposition TDs, to propose improvements before the Bill is locked down. The Government needed the scrutiny to be waived because it would have exposed the flaws, scientific inaccuracies and human consequences of this. The Government delayed sending the draft Bill to the housing committee for five months. It was finally circulated late on Friday evening. We had an online meeting on Monday with almost no notice. There was no time to review the draft, consult the stakeholders or prepare. Members were asked to vote by email and waive scrutiny privately with no transparency. This was deliberate. It was manipulation and it was a calculated effort to silence meaningful debate. Then, late last night another insult came. The Bill was meant to come out but it did not come out until 10 a.m. today. That was when we got a look at it. The tactic is to force TDs who cannot consult or get proper amendments done in time. We cannot analyse the way forward. We cannot prepare amendments with proper time when we are left with this and that exposes the weakness this scheme has caused.

It is truly meant to be the biggest scheme in the State and handled with maximum transparency but it is not. Instead, it is handled with maximum secrecy. The pyrite remediation scheme is a blueprint deliberately ignored. The pyrite scheme worked because it delivered full State-led remediation. It covered all the cost. It provided accommodation, side-by-side building, an end-to-end scheme, clear scientific standards and an independent body that replaced decisions and did not recycle them.

I have constituents and family members in Mayo and Dublin as part of two families who went through this. In Mayo, they have pyrite. They had pyrite in Dublin. The people in Dublin got 100% redress. The sister in Mayo did not. They are citizens of this country; they are treated differently. She asked me why she was getting treated like a second-class citizen. I told her that I could not answer her because that is the Government. There are two schemes in place where family members with one in Dublin who got 100% redress, and they got nothing in Mayo. Why do homeowners in the west and north west not deserve the same rights? It is the same fairness, clarity and protection. It is unequal treatment and it is unconstitutional. The advice given to the Attorney General was that using the existing model would be too expensive. It is not included in this Bill. In his press release, the Minister said that it would include side by sides. The Minister has addressed that today, late on, with the press release at 3.30 p.m. I understand that is coming and that is most welcome.

We have to try to prevent homelessness. We have to protect the elderly and disabled. We have to allow families to stay near schools, jobs and their support networks. It is essential going forward to reduce the mental health epidemic that is coming and the tsunami of homelessness. We need to speed up construction times. The Government refuses to allow developers to build entire estates overnight, but we need to get thinking quickly. Tens of thousands of houses in Donegal are going to be falling down around us in the next five to ten years. We need to act on this.

The Bill does not provide upfront payments. Homeowners cannot front €40,000 to €100,000. Many of the homes are structurally unsafe and financially worthless. If we could put in an upfront payment, we could get people up and going and get this moving fast, but we cannot at the moment, to reduce the administrative costs to ensure fairness to low-income families who are trapped, but the Government refuses this because upfront payments would demonstrate the true scale of the crisis, which is 20,000 plus at the bare minimum. I hate to say this because it breaks my heart to see this in all our constituencies from Donegal to Mayo, Limerick, Clare, Sligo and everywhere in between, it is coming. We know it is coming. The scheme forces vulnerable people to be builders, quantity surveyors, engineers and project managers. Unlike the pyrite scheme, homeowners must organise demolition, secure contractors, manage site safety, complete paperwork, prefund the works themselves, negotiate disputes and handle inspections. For people with disabilities, pensioners, single parents and people in crisis, this is not redress; this is simple abandonment. They do not have the skill level to do it. It takes a certain skill level to be a builder or contractor. As Deputy O'Donoghue will tell the Minister, it is a skill level that not a lot of people have. I have it; the Deputy has it. I have done this before. I know what it takes to build a house, and it is a skill beyond most people.

The Bill needs to be amended. Partial remediation costs more in the long run. Repeat appeals drain resources. Training engineers and outsourcing science is simply wasteful. The Housing Agency's mismanagement is an increasing liability. Legal exposure is growing, which I keep on saying. There is mishandling of this whole scheme. There are breaches in human rights, such as Articles 40 and 43. There are breaches in the EU Charter and the equality under the law. The longer this goes on, the more it is going to cost, not less. We have a Government that claims the opposite of what is happening on the ground. It is so frustrating. It has many claims that this scheme has worked, but it has not. This crisis is catastrophic and is not going to go away. A total of 100% grant coverage is false. There are caps, exclusions of families and tens of thousands have been left short. Independent appeals are false. Appeals are recycled back to the Housing Agency. The Government says: "We are following the science" which is false. IS 465 is outdated and contradicted by geological surveys. It is simply not fit for purpose and we have been told this time and time again. We need to start following the science. The Government has said this is the biggest scheme in the State. Why is it handled with secrecy, last minute drafts, hidden votes and rushed legislation? We need a clear, purposed and straight talking way of going forward where the truth has to prevail. People have to be held accountable that have let this happen to us.

The Bill does not fix the scheme. It does not deliver justice. It is does not meet scientific standards. It does not provide equality, it does not provide full redress, it does not prevent legal challenge and it does address the core value. The Government had opportunity and chose to minimise it. Families do not need spin; they need safety, they need certainty, they need equality, they need truth and they need homes. I will continue to fight for the homes and for the families.

I have an example of my own life and what is going on with me. I went out on Saturday night with my son. I had a GoPro on my head recording as we put up the Christmas lights, a memory that he can have for the rest of his life. I stood up on a ladder, looked in and saw the cracks on the wall. When I peered in, there was wall no left. That child was there underneath me and he sleeps in the room where I covered that up. I am asking and demanding the Minister to do this, and help the people all over Donegal, Mayo, Limerick, Clare and anywhere that says that we need to address this and we need to do it now. Time is running out. We do not have another 14 years. We have been here for 14 years. It is time we acted, and it is time we acted now.

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

Keira Keogh (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for being here. My colleagues have brought this up and the Whip is looking into the delay of the publication of this Bill. However, it is difficult to come in here this evening and to speak to it truly as our constituents expect us to do so. We would love to get to the bottom of why it was published so late that when we are speaking about issues, we can be well informed. Today's amendment is highly anticipated since grant increases were announced last October. Again, since this was published on 4 June, families have been wondering if they can sign off on their homes and leave the scheme. Homeowners have been wondering if they will be included in the amendment. Week after week after week, we have been getting questions about when this is going to happen and when it is going to pre-legislative scrutiny. I understand the importance of getting it here fast and people want it before Christmas, but many feel they have missed the opportunity to make representation on pre-legislative scrutiny. The people we are talking about bought or built their houses in good faith and they are depending on us to help them. These people are beyond stressed. I welcome this amendment, which is an improvement. It will increase flexibility, but it is not enough. I am still calling for the full review that we have promised in the programme of Government. I am still thinking of the constituents that I know who are elderly and want to sell their home with the grant intact. They do not want to face into a rebuild.

We need to consider mental and physical health supports. We talked a lot about suicidal thoughts among families. There are real physical conditions emerging, such as people with ticks and tremors that they are dealing with from the stress of this. Families were hoping for pre-legislative scrutiny. However, here we are; it is December 2025. The increases were announced in October 2024. I welcome that we are getting this legislation published quickly, but I regret that we have not had pre-legislative scrutiny.

The increase of 10% that will now be applied retrospectively is a welcome relief for many, but I am still going to get the question: "If I pay my bills now, will I get my retrospective payment?" According to what I have read today, they will be able to submit unpaid invoices for consideration of payment. I had a constituent in Páirc na Coille, Westport want me to ask the Minister if she will be able to get the retrospective payment if she pays her final bill now. Her contractors were waiting for her to pay in September. That is not clear from today, but maybe I am wrong. I was also asked by a cancer patient: "If anything happens to me, will my children be able to take over the scheme?"

I know improvements have been made today in relation to the relevant owner - it might apply to cohabiting people - but I am not sure if it applies to children if they were left behind. I welcome that homeowners may now apply for ancillary grants. That is really key for families with children with additional needs or physical disabilities where adaptations are needed and it might not be as easy to get temporary accommodation. That is a real practical improvement within the scheme.

I welcome the extension of a possible 24 weeks, or five and a half months, that may be applied for because the current time of 14 months just is not enough. We know how difficult it is to get a builder, plumber or painter, etc., at the moment. Recently, I spoke to a lady who told me they demolished the house but then could not find the foundations. They had to keep going down and down. She told me how much time it took to remove so much soil. Then they had to put stilts into the house. That has added on a huge amount of time. Hopefully this extra 24 weeks will be enough. I think we can all agree it is difficult to get a house built quickly in the current climate.

It is fantastic that we have so many Mayo representatives here today. We always tell our constituents at home that the Mayo TDs put on the Mayo jersey, as I am sure the Donegal TDs do. We have had Government and Opposition Deputies in the House. We will continue to work together for our constituents.

The Minister, Deputy Calleary, mentioned Clodagh Gleeson. I hope the representatives and local authorities across the country who are dealing with this are as empathic and hard working as Clodagh, who often stays up late at night at weekends trying to support the residents in Mayo. I pay tribute too to the Mayo Pyrite group, the members of which were here protesting last weekend. I hope they welcome this proposal. I know it will not be the full review they want but it is definitely welcome.

I thank the Minister of State for bringing this legislation forward. I hope we can go further and get the full review as quickly as possible so we can get full redress, or as close to it as possible, for our constituents.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. My colleagues have outlined Sinn Féin’s serious concerns with the provisions of the Bill. Its fundamental flaws must be addressed. It is clear that the defective concrete block crisis has devastated thousands of families across the State. The Government’s response to date has focused on counties Donegal, Mayo, Clare, Limerick and Sligo. While that is understandable and absolutely necessary, it is not sufficient. We need 100% redress - nothing less - for all impacted homeowners.

This is not just a problem for the west and the north west. I am aware of at least three properties in my constituency of Meath East that have been confirmed as suffering from defective blocks. Families invested their life savings in these homes, which should have been safe and secure but instead are crumbling through no fault of the owners.

Meath County Council has engaged with the Housing Agency under section 5 of the 2022 Act. Testing has been carried out and the results confirm that, as feared, defective blocks are present in County Meath, just as elsewhere. It may not be to the same scale but they are present in County Meath. The council has submitted a formal request for inclusion. The Housing Agency completed its investigations earlier this year. Following that, the agency submitted its letter of recommendation to the Department. The evidence is there and the need is urgent but we await the green light in County Meath. Families cannot wait any longer. Every day that passes without inclusion in the scheme adds to their stress and financial hardship. They deserve the same access to redress as homeowners in other counties. We need to improve that scheme, as has been outlined. I call on the Minister to act immediately to designate County Meath under this scheme and ensure that affected homeowners can apply for support without further delay. This is about fairness, equity and doing right by families who have been let down by systemic failures in construction oversight. We must make sure that no county and no family is left behind in this process. We must ensure that every household that has been impacted has access to 100% redress and nothing less.

Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome any additions to the scheme but the scheme is not right. The scheme we are talking about includes counties Limerick, Clare, Sligo, Donegal and Mayo and other areas. The latest data shows that 3,022 homeowners are at various stages of the scheme. Of those, 326 applicants have completed remediation works with a further 1,057 applicants having notified their relevant local authority. I welcome the 10% increase.

I would like to read from a letter. As everyone knows - if they do not, they will now - I am in construction and have been for all my life. Block laying is my game. I know what I am talking about. Today I received a letter from Roadstone, a CRH company. It is addressed to me, so it is for me to read out:

Dear Customer,

Roadstone has faced sustained inflationary pressures over the past year. Significant cost increases across our supply chain continue to impact operations, compounded by rising wage costs, heightened regulatory requirements, and the implications of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. The upcoming phase-out of free CO2 allowances, effective from 1 January 2026, will further intensify these challenges.

As a direct consequence Roadstone Ltd. must inform all customers of our intention to increase our prices on 1st January 2026.

Guess how much it is increasing its prices? It is increasing them by 8%. The Government is saying it is allowing 10% of an increase in costs.

I can speak from my own experience. I am on site in the mornings at 7 a.m. I was on site this morning before I came here. I had two site meetings before I arrived up here today. I am on site meeting engineers and different people. Some people who put in applications are told that they do not qualify for 100% redress. They qualify for the outside walls of their houses to come down, but the inside walls are not being covered. That is specialised work. Contractors like me do specialised work. I do not do any work for local authorities. All my work is directly for people. It is specialised work and it costs more. The disposal of materials is specialised work. An engineer has to sign off the building after it is done. Under today’s regulations, you cannot build on the foundations that remain. We are being asked to build houses and replace blockwork, with a higher density block than we were using, on top of an existing foundation. Engineers will not sign off on it.

The Minister, Deputy Calleary, spoke about accountability. I have just read from a letter I received from a company that was part, if not all, of the pyrite problem in this country. It has increased the price of materials for me over the last five years. It has gone up by 40%. The Minister talks about accountability.

I told the Minister I would give him any help I could. I thank Deputies Ward and Mac Lochlainn for the work they have done. They have been at this from the very start, including the time I have spent on the housing committee with them. The Government has not listened to one word we have said. It does not take the experience from those who have it.

During a debate on a Private Members' motion last week, we asked for people in the Civil Service who are working outside their own remit and doing wrong to be held accountable. I have a message for people who are doing wrong outside their own remit. The voting is narrowing every time there is an election. The day will come when the other side of the House will feel accountability for not acting on behalf of the people of this country. They are vulnerable. There are people it could help now if it showed some common sense.

The Government came out with a scheme for engineers. You had to be under an engineering crowd. When we had HomeBond, did it do us any good? For six years, instead of looking after properties, we had to pay extra for them. Where are they? I think they are at home bonding, but they are not helping the people of Ireland. The Government is putting in place various agencies, including the engineering crowd I have just mentioned. I have structural engineers who would design infrastructure for you, but they are not qualified now to look at a pyrite house.

These are structural engineers but they are not under the new system of the ones who are to sign off. The ones who are there to sign off for people to get a grant are not the same ones who will sign off to say someone's house is structurally sound. Where are we going? We are going around in circles. Let us circle the wagons again. Let us put another layer of bureaucratic bull where accountability should come into it. For God's sake, this thing has been rushed through. There has been no scrutiny of it and the Government has not listened to one word that we have said on it - not one word. The Government is going to let the same vulnerable people suffer over it. We hear 8% this week. Next month, it will be another 5% and the month after another 5%. Then the Government puts a 5% levy on top of that.

If there is to be any accountability in this House, it will be on the day those on the opposite side of the House get out and allow people in here who know what accountability is, who will stand up for the people who are suffering, who will try to put regulations in place and deal with those who did wrong, including the concrete companies. The Government is still helping them every single day.

Michael Collins (Cork South-West, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I broadly welcome that the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks (Amendment) Bill 2025 is finally before the House. Families have waiting for far too long for even the small improvements contained in these pages. Any step, no matter how modest, that puts a few euro back into the pockets of the struggling homeowners is good. However, let us also call things by their name. The way the Government has handled the passage of this Bill is nothing short of a disgrace. It waived pre-legislative scrutiny, it withheld the text until the very day of the debate and now it intends to ram Committee and Remaining Stages through the Dáil next week before homeowners, engineers, or advocacy groups have even had a chance to read the Bill in full. That is not good governance. It is not transparency. It is certainly not the respect that the people living in crumbling homes deserve. The Government should send this Bill to the proper select committee and do the right thing.

Independent Ireland has been very clear. When legislation affects thousands of families whose lives have been devastated financially, emotionally and mentally, the Government should not hide the Bill until the eleventh hour. It should not silence homeowners' input. It should not treat people like an inconvenience. It should bring the Bill to the committee where it belongs. It should allow scrutiny and it lets the public speak.

To be fair, I acknowledge something sincerely. There are aspects of this Bill that align with the long-standing position of those campaigning for 100% redress and with the policy of Independent Ireland. There are improvements to timelines and increases, however limited, in grant rates. There is a recognition, slow and partial as it is, that retrospective injustice had to be addressed in some form. These are points that align with the 100% Redress party's agenda, which its TD, Deputy Charles Ward, has strongly articulated in this House, and which we fully support. However, that is where the positivity ends.

The Bill, when stripped of its gloss, is still just a set of tweaks to a scheme that has already failed thousands of families. It is not new redress, it is not just justice, it does not implement the people's document and it does not come close to the standards of full, fair, 100% redress. This Bill retains the capped square metre-based grant system, the same flawed mechanism that leaves families facing shortfalls of €100,000 to €200,000, and more. Government continues to parade this capped scheme as a 100% redress scheme, even though every engineer, every campaigner and every affected homeowner knows that it is simply untrue. The cap remains. The square-metre rates remain. The financial risk remains firmly of the shoulders of the innocent homeowner.

The Bill also introduces arbitrary retrospective cut-offs and this brings me to some of the most glaring injustices that must be addressed on Committee Stage. First is the exclusion of 43 homeowners who completed rebuilds, or outer-leaf repairs before the Government's retrospective date of 29 March. These families acted in good faith, based on the Government's own message and on commitments from the Minister that early starters would not be penalised. Yet, they are being penalised. They are cut off, excluded, and left behind. The housing committee told the Minister about these 43 homeowners weeks ago but they are still outside the scheme improvements. Where is the fairness in that? What is the moral difference between a family who paid their builder in February and a family who paid in April? There is none, but the Government has invented one.

Second, this Bill excludes side-by-side rebuilds in exceptional circumstances, including cases involving disability and complex medical needs. These are families who simply cannot remain in their homes during the rebuilds. The Minister announced in June that these families would be included. Yet, the Bill forgets them entirely. That is another broken promise and another group sacrificed to the Department's obsession with controlling costs rather than protecting people.

Third, the Bill openly acknowledges that the NSAI review of I.S. 465 remains incomplete. Homeowners do not know how the revised standards will affect their remediation option or grant amount. This limbo, this scientific uncertainty, is exactly what caused the downgrading crisis that devastated families in Donegal, Mayo and beyond. If the Government is going to legislation based on an incomplete standard, it must provide effective interim guidance to engineers and local authorities until the review is finished. Otherwise, we are repeating the same mistake again.

The Government may say that the Bill makes process improvements and provides longer timelines, a longer appeal window and a technical review mechanism. These are welcome but they are welcome in the way a sticking plaster is welcome when the wound is deep and untreated. The core problem remains. This Bill preserves a scheme built on capped grants, narrow eligibility and partial date-bound retrospection, all of which fall far short of what the affected homeowners and others in the Opposition demand. It also remains utterly silent on so many vital areas. It does nothing for social housing. Even council tenants are living in the same crumbling walls as everyone else. It does nothing for schools, community buildings, farms or small businesses built with defective blocks.

It does nothing for mental health supports, even though we now have evidence of soaring rates of depression, anxiety and PTSD among affected homeowners. People are at breaking point. Families are broken, children are suffering and the Government's answer is a spreadsheet. This is not a technical issue; it a humanitarian crisis and it demands a humanitarian response. This House has seen cross-party consensus, with all acknowledge the current scheme is failing, yet the Government continues to bring forward legislation that manages the crisis instead of resolving it. By refusing scrutiny, refusing transparency and refusing to listen to the homeowners, the Government only deepens the mistrust. I will finish with this. This Bill moves a few numbers. It rearranges a few procedures. It offers partial fixes to deep injustice but it does not deliver justice. It does not deliver fairness and it certainly does not deliver 100% redress.

Paul Lawless (Mayo, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context

First, I acknowledge the great work of Mayo County Council over many years working with a very difficult scheme. I particularly acknowledge the work of Clodagh Gleeson, who has helped many families through what is the most horrendous time. She has worked tirelessly, day and night, to assist many families in the most stressful time of their lives.

This is such an important issue. It affects thousands of people and their homes. This issue has been going on for so many years and yet this Bill was only published by the Government today. This was an insult, not just to TDs in this House but to the families who have campaigned and who have been working so hard on this. This should have been an opportunity to engage with families like the ones who came up to Dublin last week from the Mayo pyrite action group. Those families were eagerly anticipating this Bill. I wanted to reach out to those families regarding this Bill but the Government failed to provide that chance. That is deeply cynical. It is wrong that the Minister has rushed such an important piece of legislation. He has not allowed any pre-legislative scrutiny in relation to this, one of the most important issues facing so many families across Mayo, Donegal, Clare, Wexford and in other pockets of this country.

The increase of 10% is welcome and I certainly support that. We have campaigned for an increase and, indeed, the retrospective payment. However, does the Government not realise the level of construction inflation over several years? This scheme is still a capped scheme.

It is still capped and will be now at €462,000. That is not 100% redress. It is important to remember this was a mistake not of the family's own making; it was the Government's lack of regulation that caused this. It was well able to charge VAT on these building projects but it was unable to provide the oversight necessary, and now these families are suffering as a result. While €462,000 might appear a lot and several years ago would have gone a significant way, have the Ministers of State priced building at the moment? It will not offer 100% redress for these families. It is only right and proper that the Government should go back to the drawing board, look into this and actually implement a scheme which has 100% redress. I do not believe it should be capped.

I welcome the fact that, following consultation with the stakeholder oversight committee, the time to complete works will increase from 65 to 130 weeks but there are long delays. I was working with a family in Mayo which has been waiting over two years in relation to this committee.

On the exclusions for early builders, I would like to ask what is the difference between a family who paid for a house in February 2024 and one who paid in April 2024. There are families in that scenario who will no doubt be ringing my office tomorrow. What shall we tell them? This is the Ministers' Bill and I would like a response to that. I welcome the amendment but there is a long way to go in addressing the issues so many families across Mayo face.

A family in my constituency has been forced into making a retention planning application for an attic-space conversion. It will cost the family more money. I ask the Ministers of State to look at those issues which might seem small from their lovely seats in Leinster House but those issues force families to spend more money on a house that is crumbling. A workaround or solution could be found involving an engineer or a declaration from a solicitor. The family is not looking for meterage in relation to the conversion; it is just looking to get on the scheme but this is a barrier.

All these issues create additional costs for families. The entire attitude of the Government needs to change. It needs to look at this not as a Government grant or subsidy that individuals are lucky or privileged to access. It is a compensation scheme for the State's failing. It is really important the Government changes its attitude to this. This is not a grant.

I welcome the scheme but will continue to fight for the families to ensure we achieve 100% redress and address the many other issues in relation to this.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this Bill. It will deliver some much-needed changes to the original legislation. It is unfortunate it has taken a year to get to this point. That is longer than it should have taken. I worked hard at Cabinet on securing the decision in October 2024 that whenever the new rates came in, they would be applied retrospectively. It has taken 12 months for that to come to the Dáil in this legislation. One of the frustrations of the implementation and development of the defective block legislation and schemes in recent years has been the amount of time taken to step out each part of the process. It is nonetheless welcome. I know it is complex to deal with legislation but it should not have taken that length of time. Nonetheless, it is important and welcome we are at this point in the Dáil today and getting it into place.

I recognise the commitment of the Minister, Deputy Browne, to this process. I know it has been a frustration to him. He has wanted to get this delivered and brought in. Each time I have pressed him over the past year, he has equally been pressing to move it on and has expressed frustration in terms of the time as well. He has worked hard, as have his officials. We see today 28 pages of technical legislation to implement these changes. It is unfortunate it took that amount of time. I also recognise the work of the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, who has given his commitment to this process and legislation, as well as his work on behalf of the Elm Park residents in Buncrana.

While it has taken too long to get to this point, it is important we complete it by Christmas, if at all possible. I know that is the commitment and desire of people across the House. There are three weeks of Oireachtas time left, including this week, before Christmas. The Opposition parties facilitated the waiving of pre-legislative scrutiny after discussion at the Oireachtas committee. It is entirely doable, by coming together over the next three weeks, to give this attention now, after being published this morning, which is, again, later than I would have liked. There are three weeks to fully assess it, bring it through Committee Stage in the Dáil and bring it through Second and Committee Stages in the Seanad, where it is also possible to interrogate it and for amendments to be fully discussed. Those three weeks should be utilised, if at all possible, to bring the legislation through. We would not want to see it going into the new year because people are waiting on the retrospective payment in relation to the 10%, in particular.

The steps taken in the Bill are welcome. There is a 10% increase to the maximum overall rate, bringing it from €420,000 to €462,000, and a retrospective increase of around 8% in square foot rates. It is important that is applied to people who started building and got their grant rate before October 2024. The increase in the number of weeks allowed for the completion of a build from 65 to 130 is important, as is reducing the notice needed for an extension from 12 weeks to two. The option is being put into legislation for owners who already had an option 2 to 5 to avail of a technical review once I.S. 465 is finalised. That issue has arisen since the original legislation came through. It is important it be addressed now. New science is under consideration by the National Standards Authority that any homeowner who had less than full demolition in their original grant would get the opportunity to have the decision reviewed against the new standard which, we have no doubt, will be different from what was there previously. Another important step is the change so somebody who was not the relevant owner but was married to, cohabiting with or in civil partnership with the relevant owner at the time the legislation was brought in and subsequently, for example, separated but is still living in that property - I know there are a small number of such cases - can avail of the scheme and get his or her current home remediated.

I know the Minister will bring forward a decision in relation to side-by-side building for people with medical needs. That will be important and it will be important that it properly encapsulates people with medical needs and is inclusive of the different people who have been brought to his attention. That is something I have been working on with him. Another important step allows two semi-detached builds to be progressed at the same time rather than having to be done separately, which created many issues, had to be addressed and should not be the case.

The defective concrete block legislation was passed in the summer of 2022 and the new scheme came in in the summer of 2023.

We have seen very significant progress. It bears no resemblance to the scheme that was there two and half years ago and was in place until summer 2023. Under the old scheme, the maximum was €247,000 on a 90:10 basis. A maximum of 90% could be received and there was no storage and no rent. Homeowners had to come up with the upfront cost of testing, which was in the region of €7,000. There was also no availability or access to the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland energy grants. Many homeowners are able to avail of between €25,000 and €30,000 - in most cases anyway, it is €25,000 - alongside the actual grant rate. This is important because this was not there in the last one. It is a significant and massive departure for the scheme from what was there in the past, which certainly did not work. There has been a significant departure and progress in what we are seeing on the ground.

When the old scheme was in place, from my memory, work had commenced and started on a number of houses in the high double digits. It was a small number. We have seen a step change with the new legislation and massive progress on the ground. If we are looking at Donegal, and I will focus on my county alone in relation to this issue, 784 homes in total have commenced work up to this point, and that number is increasing every week. A total of 784 houses in Donegal that have now commenced. Of those 784 houses, 205 are now complete and have finished the job. Those people have their homes remediated and are, thankfully, out of that nightmare. Of the rest, 579 are under construction. That is in Donegal alone. It is a massive step change in the last two and a half years. You can see that with your eyes as you travel around the county.

There is a massive amount of work yet to take place and that we need to do. There is a big challenge at the moment with building and trades and massive pressure on those areas. Building capacity is now the main constraint on the number of houses that can be done. About 1,328 in total have had their grant approved. That is welcome, but there is more to be done. As we go forward, we must make sure the scheme is appropriate and adjusted as necessary to real-life experience.

More also needs to be done on other issues. The social housing scheme should be in place but is not. It is not good enough it is not there. That needs to be brought in immediately. As with the private sector and people in their private homes, there are also council homes that need to be addressed. This aspect has been too slow and needs to be dealt with. The appeals process likewise has been too slow. It has only started to move in recent times. That also needs to push on. Likewise, the review of the IS 465 standard by the National Standards Authority of Ireland needs to move. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, said today that is expected in the first quarter of next year. It does need to come then because other deadlines that have been given before have been missed. We need to see that. It will then inform the new standard, which will allow people who have options 2 to 5 to get their decisions reviewed against up-to-date and current science. It must also inform the new standard for concrete blocks that will be coming out of it. Again, this must be informed by the up-to-date science the authority is dealing with.

We must ensure we act in relation to the mortgaging of homes that are not necessarily affected, or will not be affected long term but cannot be sold. Again, this is because we do not have the standard in place to be able to inform conveyancing decisions. This too is an issue that needs to be addressed. The other big thing we need to see concerns apartments and multi-unit developments. This is tied to the legislation for defective apartments in Dublin and other parts of the country. That legislation has not come to the House yet. Any multi-unit developments in Donegal are waiting on the east coast apartment legislation to be dealt with in order that they will be included in it. When that legislation comes through the House, it is important it fully include the capacity for multi-unit developments to be fully replaced where they have defective concrete blocks. It is going to be really important. At the moment, they cannot avail of this scheme, but that legislation needs to come through the House and there needs to be follow-through as well.

I recognise the work of the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, with the residents of Elm Park in Buncrana. A number of homes there were built on a flood plain, somewhere they should never have been built. All of them have defective concrete in them. They cannot be rebuilt in the place where they are and will have to be moved. The Ministers of State, Deputy O'Sullivan and Deputy Moran, have had meetings in this regard, and the Minister, Deputy Browne, is very committed to bringing this issue to a finality as well. I ask that he bring this decision to a finality by Christmas because those homeowners need that certainty as to what is going to happen. They need to know they will be accommodated with a different solution that will allow them to move away from where they are, rebuild and get new homes elsewhere, and not rebuild in the place they are in now. All of that is required.

There has been massive work and progress to date. I see it in my own county. It is a stressful and traumatic experience for everyone concerned. Thankfully, some people have come out of that. Many are in the middle of it. Many are still waiting and have not got to it. It is certainly my objective as a public representative in government to work every week to try to make sure the progress we have seen is continued - just as it was my objective to hold the then Government to account in terms of progress on this when I was in opposition - and to make sure we get to the stage where every family can get out of the nightmare they should never have had to live through in the first place.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a bit galling, to be brutally frank with the Minister of State, to listen to him telling us all about how frustrated he is and how somebody really should do something, how the blockages must be removed and how deeply frustrated he is that things are taking so long. Who could possibly be to blame? I know it is Christmas, but he could spare us the bloody pantomime.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a good job you are not in government.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Come on. I am telling-----

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has been two and a half years since Sinn Féin promised its own legislation. It is a good job that Deputy O'Reilly is not in government.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Do not interrupt me. I listened to 12 minutes of the Minister of State describing his frustration but never managing to mention who it is he is frustrated with and who is causing these delays. The power is his. He is in government. He is the Government but, my God, he is so frustrated with the delays. That act does not fool anyone. It certainly does not fool me. It certainly would not fool people looking in this evening whose houses are crumbling down around their ears and have to hear their kids ask when they are going to get their new house and when they will be able to sleep. I know this because I have dealt with this issue in my constituency. People's lives were ruined. Mention was made earlier of post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD. These people will absolutely have to live with the consequences, even after the scaffolding is taken down. My constituents waited for years because their houses were just not bad enough. They had to wait until their houses were crumbling down around their ears. They had to wait until their living conditions got so bad that they could get into the scheme. Even after that, the trauma continues.

The publication of the legislation shows us the Government has learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from the litany of its past mistakes. This was all acknowledged by the Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue, as if it was somehow somebody else's fault. Give us a break, for God's sake. It is utterly shameless of him to come in here and pretend and say somebody should do something. Really? That somebody is him. People were promised 100% redress. That is what they expect. It is not their fault the blocks were defective. It is no fault of theirs. The Minister of State and his colleagues were in government. Maybe it is their fault. Would the Minister of State assume any responsibility? He does not take any responsibility at all. It is always somebody else's fault.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What have you done, Deputy O'Reilly?

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is my time, so I will speak, thank you.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What-----

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is always somebody else's fault with youse.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I think you are a little bit biased.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last week, there was a response to a question of mine, taken by my party colleague Deputy Ó Broin, to ask the Minister when my constituents living in Skerries and Rush will be facilitated with entry into the scheme, because they too are suffering due to defective blocks. My colleague made the point the report is on the Minister's desk. Do you know what the Minister said? We must bear in mind this debate took place very late at night and my constituents waited up to watch it. Some of them are elderly. They are all terrified. Their houses are damp and mouldy and bits are falling off. The Minister said that one thing he noted was how often somebody tells him that there is something on his desk when his desk is empty.

Does the Minister of State think that kind of smart-alecky answer is going to cut it with people? It really is not and neither is his pantomime act coming in here pretending like it is somebody else's fault or that somebody else has the power to help people. They were promised 100% redress. That is not what is in this. They want to see the Government working with the Opposition, listening, taking amendments on board and ensuring this legislation is fit for purpose because it is not.

Ruairí Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State accepted this is all taking far too long. He accepted that there are huge issues in relation to social housing, appeals and the standards review. We are where we are and we all accept that, as the people who are dealing with crumbling houses have to accept it. Nobody likes legislation that is dropped at the last minute without any possibility of proper scrutiny but, the fact is, if the Minister of State is talking about the next three weeks, the Government really has to be open to listening to the amendments that are being proposed to deal with the issues he spoke of himself and actually ensuring we deliver.

A huge number of people and houses have been impacted in Donegal, Mayo, Clare, Limerick and Sligo. Deputy Louise O'Reilly spoke about the fact that she has constituents who need to be brought into this. Deputy Darren O'Rourke also spoke about that and I am going to add that I am aware of at least four cases in Louth. Louth County Council has been engaging with the Department and the Housing Agency. I think it believed at one stage there was an alternative methodology in dealing with such a low number but at this stage, the application is going in with regard to Louth being taken into this defective concrete blocks scheme.

We would like that the scheme to provide what it should have in the beginning, which is 100% redress. We would like that there would not still be the issue in relation to caps and arbitrary dates, where if people have not paid the money between particular dates, they would not be covered. Even having regard to the slight improvements in the legislation, none of this is good enough. The Minister of State could have listened to Deputies Rose Conway-Walsh, Pearse Doherty, Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, Charles Ward or anyone. He could listen to his own constituents because I have no doubt, given the part of the world he is from, he has been inundated with people who have been dealing with their houses falling down for years. The Minister of State is right that all of this has taken far too long so it is absolutely vital that the work is done over the next couple of weeks. We should have been at this point earlier and we should, even at this point, have had a greater level of engagement with all the necessary stakeholders. We should not be looking at these problems still needing to be fixed but they do still need to be fixed.

Can we make a serious attempt to get this done so we stop failing the people of the counties that have been spoken about? Can we also ensure the likes of my constituents in Louth are facilitated, and that people are not looking at cracks that become even bigger cracks and houses that are not in any way safe and secure? In fairness, I was very taken with what Deputy Charles Ward had said about doing something very nice for his kid by putting up the Christas lights and then all of a sudden, dealing with the reality of the defective block crisis, tragedy and disaster. In fairness, like Deputy O'Reilly said, it was brought on by this Government's lack of regulatory systems going back over multiple years and now the lack of speed, efficiency and a scheme that will actually deliver.

We really and truly need to deal with the issues the Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue, laid out himself and we have to look after these people because they have been dealing with failure after failure. Whether it is Donegal, Mayo, Sligo, those in Deputy O'Reilly's constituency, my constituency or Deputy O'Rourke's constituency, we need to look after them with 100% redress and a scheme that works, and not leave people out of pocket. Most people do not have the €50,000 or €60,000 that is needed because this scheme is not, at this point in time, fit for purpose.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As no other Members wish to speak, I will ask the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, to make his concluding remarks.

Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank all the Deputies for their valued contributions on Second Stage. The amendments in this Bill, as outlined earlier by the Minister once again clearly illustrate the Government's commitment to continuing to support homeowners in counties affected by defective concrete blocks as they work to remediate their homes and move on with their lives. I understand how difficult it is for people. Limerick is a county where people have dealt with pyrite and defective concrete blocks. Taking up the point that Deputy Ó Murchú made, counties can apply to be part of the defective concrete blocks scheme through their local authorities. It is something that we did in Limerick a while back.

Changes were brought about to the original scheme under the 2022 Act that provide further benefits for homeowners. The changes proposed take note of the concerns brought to my Department by various stakeholders in the grant scheme. I want affected homeowners to have confidence in the scheme and to know they are being listened to and, more importantly, supported by Government.

As outlined by my ministerial colleagues, the main purpose of the Bill is to provide details to the wider group of relevant owners who can avail of the most recent increases in the grant scheme cap and rates. This will ensure that those homeowners who have received a determination but who were experiencing increased construction costs during their own remediation works can apply to their designated local authority for an increase in the remediation option grant. I understand this will benefit a large number of homeowners in terms of thousands of euro each and indeed up to a maximum amount of €42,000 in some cases. I know this is much-needed and I feel it will certainly help to ease the financial burden on homeowners during what I know have been deeply distressing times in their lives. I have witnessed it first-hand with constituents.

I assure homeowners that we are committed to making this scheme work. No scheme is perfect but the changes we are proposing will have a real impact for homeowners, some of whom, without a doubt, find themselves in very difficult circumstances. We will continue to work with local authorities, the construction sector and the Housing Agency to deliver a scheme that can help homeowners to fix their homes and move on with their lives.

In an area as complex as defective concrete blocks, it is perhaps inevitable that at times, any scheme will, despite the best of original intentions, not address all the concerns of each and every applicant. This is to be expected given the fact that each and every household affected by the scourge of defective concrete blocks has its own unique and personal story to tell. Unfortunately, legislation does not often lend itself to capture and respond to all of these personal stories. The best we can do is, through experience and engagement, react to and improve things as we progress. In the first instance, this is what the Bill is about. It is staging interventions made necessary by homeowners' experience under the enhanced scheme over the past number of years. These interventions will, I firmly believe, make the scheme fairer and allow it to operate more efficiently and effectively for all those who are in it.

I understand the challenges for the families affected by defective concrete blocks. In particular, I am very much aware of certain vulnerable families. The circumstances of a small number of families have been highlighted to me over the past number of months. These are, without doubt, very difficult for the families concerned. The Government is committed to helping these families as much as possible.

While not in the Bill, an amendment to allow the construction of adjacent dwellings in specific circumstances will be brought forward on Committee Stage. The intention of this amendment is to provide that homeowners in specific circumstances will be able to rebuild in the general vicinity of their current dwelling, allowing them to remain in their current home during the reconstruction period. I know it could be seen as going against the fundamental principle of the scheme, that is, of rebuilding current homes, but I genuinely feel that this is an exception that is needed and worth making in the circumstances. This will provide meaningful help and greater assistance for the most vulnerable in moving on with the scheme. We have listened and continue to listen to the concerns raised.

An amendment will also be tabled on Committee Stage that will assist owners of houses that are conjoined, be they semi-detached or terraced, etc., where one has received a determination but the other attached dwelling has yet to meet the scheme's damage threshold. This amendment will help speed up the process for the other dwelling to be assessed for determination of the option grant amount and then if both owners desire, they can go ahead and remediate their homes at the same time. It is a flexible measure that, once again, shows how responsive the Government is to the genuine needs of homeowners. A lot of work has been put in to bringing about these changes. Affected homeowners have put significant time and effort into working with my Department through the homeowners' liaison officer. I thank them for their work, which has shaped this scheme and helped to improve the scheme for all impacted homeowners. I also pay tribute to the homeowners and their representatives who have engaged with the process through various channels, including the public consultation for the draft IS 465 standard, which yielded in excess of 640 submissions.

Ireland's official standards body, the National Standards Authority of Ireland, has been tasked with the review of the national standard IS 465.

It expects the revision of IS 465 to conclude in the first quarter of 2026. This updated standard will provide further reassurances to homeowners affected by defective concrete blocks. The Department stands ready to ensure the scheme reflects the results of this process and indeed is ready to initiate the review that this new standard will require.

In addition, I acknowledge colleagues in this House from the impacted counties who have been tireless advocates, both publicly and, more often, behind the scenes, to press the case for the impacted homeowners not just over the past year but over several years. Many have alluded to this. Their hard work, commitment and dedication have been commendable. The scheme is delivering for many homeowners in affected counties and the challenge now proposed will represent a step forward in ensuring that everybody is fairly dealt with in terms of support. The Bill is by no means the end of the defective blocks journey for anyone involved, least of all this Government. It is a staging post that provides a timely opportunity to intervene and respond to developments over the past few years. Such opportunities will no doubt arise and will be needed again. My colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan, referred to the fact that our Department is preparing to launch a review of the Act in its entirety next year, including the changes made by this Bill. This intersects both with the review of the IS 465 national standard and the three-year anniversary of the commencement of the current scheme.

I have listened carefully and with genuine interest to the contributions made by Members during these discussions. I thank them on my own behalf and that of the Minister, Deputy James Browne for their contributions and general support for the Bill. The contributions clearly indicated the importance of measures proposed in the amendment Bill. I very much welcome the broad support for the content of the Bill. We will work with all sides of the House to ensure prompt enactment. I thank Members for all their attention and contributions today and look forward to further engagement on Committee Stage.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State has to take out the date of 29 March; I am begging him.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 3 December 2025.