Darragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Gavan for the amendment and thank Senators for their contributions. There is mention in the very first section that the damage category ratings and thresholds exist to ensure that we can prioritise the worst homes first. We need to do that because, potentially, thousands of homes are affected so this scheme will be with us for quite some time. Also, we want people to apply to join the scheme.

The way that the amendment is structured means that if people do not apply for a couple of years but when they do join and the damage threshold is worse than someone else then the new applicant would be placed ahead of someone else who is already in the scheme. What we will do is prioritise the people in the scheme. Obviously we want people to apply to the scheme. I will prescribe the criteria by which the Housing Agency will determine the way it will assess applications, which includes the level of damage. We will do that in the regulations and it will be very clear.

I wish to advise Senators Dooley, Blaney and Gavan that once people meet the minimum thresholds of damage then it is above that when one gets into the scheme. Then, when one gets into the scheme, we must prioritise how the work is done. Obviously there is a remediation option. There are a number of options within the scheme. It is important to state that for the non-full demolition options we will allow a second access to the scheme. We are providing a guarantee on the work so options 2 to 5, as they are known.

We must manage the workload. That means not just processing applications but analysing how many people can actually do the work, and assess the capacity of the sector in the affected regions to carry out that work. I have a lot of experience of that in my own area in terms of pyrite and infill in what has been referred to as the east coast scheme, which is the removal of infill in foundations. The damage category ratings work to be able to ensure that the homes that were worst affected are done first.

Senator Dooley made a good point about filled cracks. Certainly if there are issues where people have done remediation work as a stop-gap move then that acts like a sticking plaster and does not deal with the fundamental problem that house has. In my view such a situation would not keep somebody out of the scheme. Again, I have experience of people saying they did such work.

Earlier Senator Blaney made a point that is relevant to this amendment whereby someone who is already in the scheme is given a remediation option, say, one of the non-demolition options, but when it comes time to do the work the damage looked worse. In that case, the person can get back into the scheme but that would be a second application, which would be prioritised by the Housing Agency based on the new evidence.