Darragh O'Brien (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit go dtí an Seanad agus comhghairdeas freisin. I wish him all the best in his new role. I am delighted for him and am certain he will acquit himself well. I thank him for attending, as my Adjournment motion relates to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, in which he has responsibility for housing, planning and co-ordination. Although he must still read himself into his brief, I urge him to pay specific attention to the pyrite issue.

As many of my colleagues know, the first legislation on pyrite was produced by me in the Seanad. It is a major issue. I broadly welcomed the establishment of the Pyrite Resolution Board, but it and the Minister need to report on the progress of the remediation scheme. Some home owners have applied for remediation but have not had their applications approved yet. In many instances, this seems to be the case because the builders who built their homes are still trading and-or the builder or home owner is involved in litigation. Unfortunately, a number of people from the Lusk village action group and the Lusk pyrite action group could not be present for this debate because the scheduling of additional business left us unsure, but they are watching online. They have done a ferocious amount of work and have been involved since the start. The north Dublin area has been particularly hit by the scourge of pyrite.

Will the Minister of State look into the concern that I am about to raise? In respect of the home owners in question in Lusk village and an estate in Donabate in north County Dublin, the resolution board is taking a long time - "stalling" would be the wrong word - to confirm whether their houses will be remediated because the builders are trading or may be taking legal action against quarries or other parties.

I debated the board's establishment with the former Minister, Deputy Hogan, and met the board during its briefings in the Custom House. Colleagues such as Deputy Clare Daly and I were assured that the State reserved the right to pursue builders or those it felt were at fault for some or all of the costs. I agree with that approach, but it does not have to be done before the applications are approved.

In the case of Lusk village, the board is considering compliance with eligibility requirements, including the availability of other practicable options. I have no issue with that, but I do not want hundreds of home owners whose houses comply with the requirements - those requirements are not perfect, but they are a start - left to the end because we are waiting for the result of legal cases. When I put these points to the then Minister, I was assured that it would not be the case. I fully support the State's right to pursue those who were negligent or at fault to recoup those funds. I do not want home owners in Lusk village to be left dealing with the estate's builder, whom they claim has not been co-operative with the process in any way, shape or form.

One of the reasons we are in this situation is because HomeBond refused to pay to remediate these homes, yet we learned recently that the pyrite board had entered into a partnership and concluded a contract with HomeBond for project management services to remediate affected homes. This is difficult for us and the home owners to take.

Will the Department seek confirmation from the Pyrite Resolution Board that, where the State is recouping costs, home owners' in-fill will be removed and their houses remediated regardless of whether the relevant builders are still trading or legal actions are pending?