2026-06-24

Leanfaimid ar aghaidh leis an gcéad ábhar eile, an tairiscint maidir le freagracht an Stáit maidir le coinneáil priacail i leith bunsraithe i dtithe le coincréid lochtach.

I move: That Dáil Éireann: notes that: — thousands of homeowners affected by defective concrete have spent years living with uncertainty regarding the safety of their homes, the adequacy of available remediation options and the long-term security of their families; — many affected families have experienced repeated changes in engineering advice, evolving scientific understanding and revisions to the redress scheme throughout that period; — for homeowners undertaking remediation works, decisions regarding whether existing foundations should be retained or replaced are among the most significant and irreversible choices they will make; — the Defective Concrete Blocks Grant Scheme permits the retention of existing foundations in affected dwellings in accordance with the updated National Standards Authority of Ireland I.S. (Irish Standard) 465:2026; — research underpinning I.S. 465:2026 has identified pyrrhotite and other sulphide minerals in the concrete foundations of affected homes, with evidence of oxidation and early-stage internal sulphate attack in some cases; — the scientific basis underpinning I.S. 465:2026 remains limited in duration, scale and longitudinal evidence, and does not conclusively establish long-term foundation performance; — as a result, I.S. 465:2026 operates in circumstances of acknowledged material scientific uncertainty regarding long-term structural durability; and — affected homeowners are being required to make decisions about retaining or remediating foundations in conditions of that uncertainty, with significant financial, legal and psychological consequences; recognises that: — the State is relying on I.S. 465:2026 as the governing technical standard for remediation decisions, despite acknowledged scientific uncertainty in its underpinning evidence; — where the State adopts a Standard in conditions of uncertainty, it must bear responsibility for managing resulting long-term structural risk and not transfer it to individual homeowners; — homeowners should not be exposed to future liability or repeated remediation costs arising from limitations in the scientific evidence base underpinning the Standard; and — in circumstances where failure mechanisms may be latent, progressive and not fully observable within assessment timeframes, policy must err decisively on the side of homeowner protection; and calls on the Government to: — commission an independent international review of the scientific basis of I.S. 465:2026, with specific focus on sulphide-related deterioration mechanisms in foundation concrete and their long-term behaviour; — publish in full the evidential basis, assumptions and uncertainty ranges used to justify foundation retention under I.S. 465:2026; — amend the operation of the Defective Concrete Blocks Grant Scheme to ensure that no homeowner is required to retain foundations where there is material engineering uncertainty regarding long-term durability; — provide an explicit entitlement for homeowners to opt for full foundation replacement where reasonable doubt exists as to future performance; — ensure that responsibility for residual long-term structural risk arising from application of I.S. 465:2026 remains with the State and not individual homeowners; and — report to Dáil Éireann within six months on the implementation of these measures and on any revision required to I.S. 465:2026 in light of emerging scientific evidence. I thank all those who worked on this motion, particularly my staff and 100% Redress party councillors who work every day on the ground dealing with owners of homes with defective concrete. I thank Dr. Chris Brough and Professor Paul Dunlop for their extremely important research on this topic. I also thank all the Opposition TDs and their parties for supporting this motion. The motion is about the State making decisions about people's homes in circumstances where its own technical standard accepts the science is not fully developed in certain foundation cases. These decisions determine remediation, housing security and the level of uncertainty families are left carrying for decades. At the centre of this is a simple question. When the science is not complete and the State must still act, who carries what remains unresolved? Is it the State or the homeowner? I should inform the House that I am directly affected by this matter and I deal with it every day. I am living with a defective concrete crisis. I am not relying on this at this stage of the argument but I mention it because it requires me to examine engineering reports and technical matters in great detail. What these reports make clear is not a disagreement about whether the risk exists. It is how the uncertainty is defined in the system and how it is carried into decisions that affect homes, finance and long-term security. The real issue is how known limits in technical knowledge become policy decisions. The governing standard says that the state of knowledge relating to foundations is insufficient to provide guidance for certain combinations of aggregate and active internal sulfate attack, ISA, risk factors. This is the precise limitation written into the standard. It acknowledges there are defined foundation conditions where scientific knowledge is insufficient for decision-making. The standard continues that undertaking sampling, testing and analysis of foundation concrete is expected to strengthen the knowledge base and inform future editions of the document. Therefore, the framework is not final. It is expected to evolve as more evidence becomes available. Since tabling this motion, I hosted a scientific briefing in Leinster House attended by researchers directly involved in investigating defective concrete deterioration mechanisms across Ireland. The purpose of the briefing was not to challenge the science. It was to listen to the science, which was presented. It reinforced a point already acknowledged in IS 465, that is, that understanding continues to evolve as more testing is undertaken and long-term evidence becomes available. The research highlighted that the scale of the affected properties will continue to expand significantly as testing progresses and deterioration becomes visible on properties that may not yet exhibit symptoms. This is precisely why this motion matters. When an evidence base is still developing, public policy must be designed to accommodate the reality, rather than assume all future outcomes are already known. It also states the purpose of foundation concrete testing is to identify, first, aggregate types, second, deleterious materials, and, third, potential future deterioration. Testing identifies risk factors but it does not resolve how these factors behave over time in every case. Importantly, foundation testing does not provide a full evaluation of a foundation's current conditions, which would necessitate more extensive sampling for inspection. Even after testing, there are recognised limits to what is known about the structure. This is a technical engineering standard and is not designed for conveyancing or property transactions but, in practice, it is now influencing mortgage assessments, insurance decisions and property values in affected areas. This is not theatrical. This is already reflected when homes are valued, financed and traded. In places like Donegal, defects and uncertainty are already visible in the housing market. The House should reflect carefully what was presented at the scientific briefing. The research did not present an estimate for all homes in Donegal. Analysis indicated a minimum of 12,000 homes in Donegal alone may ultimately fall within the high-risk category. That does not include social homes, of which there are 2,400, or community buildings, of which there are hundreds. It does not include commercial premises or mixed-use buildings. The distinction is extremely important. When we hear a figure of 12,000 homes, we are not looking at the full housing picture. It is a baseline. We are looking at only one segment of it. For years the State has pointed at figures of approximately 10,000 affected homes nationally, yet we have scientific analysis to suggest Donegal alone will exceed that figure. If that analysis is proven correct, the scale of this crisis has been profoundly underestimated. We must ask ourselves whether future risk has also been underestimated. The position is clear. The science is incomplete in defined areas. The standard acknowledges this directly. Decisions are still required within a framework. When that happens, uncertainty does not disappear. It is carried forward by the system and, in practice, the homeowners. The classification approach in the standard reinforces this structure. It states that foundation concrete should be classified in accordance with samples of foundation concrete from the highest risk classification. That would be the core sample taken with the most damage. Where multiple indicators exist, the highest classification must apply. Risk is not averaged. In determining the strongest identifying factor, where uncertainty is not fully resolved, it is not eliminated at the point of decision. It is deferred. This is the issue. Deferred uncertainty returns later as further remediation works, higher public costs and increased complexity as scientific understanding develops over time. What is not resolved does not disappear; it re-emerges later on. It will be more costly. This motion is not a criticism of the scientists, engineers or researchers who have worked on and informed IS 465 - quite the opposite. Good science identifies not only what is known but also what is not yet known. The research has been transparent about the limits of current evidence. We need ongoing testing and expectations that understanding will continue to develop. The question before the House is, therefore, whether we trust a science. The question is whether policy is responding appropriately to what the science is telling us. We have remaining uncertainty. This policy question is not a scientific one. This motion does not challenge the standard. It accepts what it states. It asks straightforward questions of policy coherence. Where the State accepts scientific knowledge is not yet complete in certain foundation conditions, should the consequences and uncertainty be carried by the homeowner by default? If the answer is "Yes", then this is a clear policy choice. If the answer is "No", the system must adjust to reflect the reality of what is going on. This matters because the decision before us is not simply about foundations; it is about the consequences of being wrong. The State has got this badly wrong once already. We are 14 years into this. Poor quality materials entered homes across affected counties and families are still paying the price today. We are being asked to make long-term foundation decisions in circumstances where the Government standard acknowledges limitations in current knowledge, where the evidence base continues to evolve and where there is uncertainty regarding long-term performance of retained foundations. If the scale of defective properties is significantly greater than previously understood, then potential consequences will be enormous. Saving money today by retaining foundations where reasonable doubt remains may reduce immediate expenditure but if those assumptions are proved incorrect in the years ahead, the cost will dwarf any short-term saving. The cost will not be simply financial; it will be measured in homes requiring further remediation, families forced to go through a process for a second time and properties that become difficult to finance, insure and sell. In a housing system already struggling to meet demand, the State's first failure contributed to this crisis. It would be unforgivable if, in attempting to resolve it, we were to spend public money in a manner that risked creating an even greater housing crisis. When uncertainty remains, caution is not an expensive option. Caution is a reasonable option. It is important to be clear what this means in practice. These are not abstract issues. They affect a home and whether a home can be sold, remortgaged or insured. They affect whether families can rely on their homes as stable, long-term assets. They affect financial security and the housing market in Donegal and all affected counties.

I thank Deputy Ward for tabling this important motion and for his diligent attention to detail on this issue. It is about making sure the Government cannot get away with just burying the issue and saying it is now dealt with - it is definitely not dealt with. This has fundamentally been the approach of the past number of Governments in terms of trying to bury this from the very start of the scandal. The campaign started in 2011. Affected households were fobbed off for nearly ten years, forced to campaign strongly, forced to protest and forced to organise in an extremely impressive way that put huge pressure on the Government before finally getting a remediation scheme that may turn out to be based on faulty scientific evidence. I pay tribute to the campaigners who got us to this point and who continue to push. I thank them for their generosity with their time and solidarity in assisting us when we were getting the campaign of redress for those affected by apartment and duplex defects off the ground. They had plenty of things on their plate but were willing to come to big meetings and small meetings to talk about their experience and how a campaign could be built on an issue that fundamentally has the same foundations, in the sense of a lax approach to regulation by the Government and various corporate operators operating like cowboys to maximise profit at the expense of ordinary householders. The problem is the remediation scheme we now have may be based on faulty scientific evidence. We heard from Deputy Ward how IS 465:2026 may not stand the test of time. It acknowledges that itself by admitting there is uncertainty about the scientific evidence. That uncertainty might not be anyone's fault but it is certainly not the fault of affected households. We know that for a fact. That has to be the guiding principle in this. None of this is the fault of affected households. They should not be the ones to suffer the consequences. Unfortunately, they have been the only ones to suffer any real consequences to this point. Pending the outcome of legal cases, it is not clear Donegal County Council, the National Standards Authority of Ireland or the block suppliers and quarry operators will be made to pay. Cassidy Brothers Concrete Products Limited, Cassidy Brothers Topmix Limited and Cranford Concrete Products Limited are all being taken to court by affected households. The scale of the scandal remains huge. We heard a lot of scientific evidence and detail in the briefing organised by Deputy Charles Ward and the 100% Redress Party yesterday but I have to say the thing that stuck with me most was the evidence suggesting that we are not even at the middle of this scandal yet; we are only in the early phase of this scandal. The broad public outside the counties which have the most affected households up to this point would be shocked to realise that we are only at the start of this process. I think the Government may be shocked to realise this but the evidence presented was very strong. The latest scientific evidence is that 20,000 houses in estates in Donegal, Mayo, Clare and Limerick are affected. That does not include one-off housing, which we know there is a lot of in those counties, social housing, business premises or community buildings. We also know that defective concrete is not confined to those four counties and that it is a problem in other counties as well but we do not have sight of the sort of numbers that would be involved there. The 20,000 households is not the whole picture but only part of it. The central problem with IS 465:2026 is that it allows the retention of concrete foundations in certain circumstances - circumstances that may turn out to be based on faulty scientific assumptions. The evidence presented yesterday was absolutely compelling. Geoscientists Professor Paul Dunlop and Dr. Chris Brough told us about sulphide oxidation, internal sulphate attack, long-term deterioration mechanisms in defective concrete that can affect retained foundations. That is a huge problem because the foundation of your house is exactly that. It is the foundation upon which everything else rests. If the foundation is faulty then your whole house, your whole home and your whole life is insecure - you are literally resting on faulty foundations. No matter what happens above ground, if your foundations are faulty you have a very big problem. Imagine the psychological impact of that for a moment. We have all seen the pictures and heard the stories and you can talk to Deputy Charles Ward about the reality of living in such a house. You have gone through the heartache of your home falling apart and potentially the massive stress of campaigning to fight for some sort of justice for yourself, your family and your local community, you have gone through the hassle of applying for remediation and the disruption of having the house substantially rebuilt and now it could turn out that the foundation is still faulty. In a worst-case scenario the whole thing may need to be demolished and rebuilt again. That is an unthinkable prospect for people. It is enough to drive anyone over the edge. Even if demolition is not needed in future, the fact that uncertainty remains about the long-term durability of the foundation creates massive issues for homeowners. Their remediated house is still not the same as another house. If there is still a bad smell around it for prospective buyers, banks and insurance companies, they may face difficulties remortgaging or if they need to sell for whatever reason – if they need to move somewhere else in the country or out of the country or any other reason – they simply cannot sell their house and so they are stuck with this. To add insult to injury, all this can then be passed on to their children after they die, turning what has been a nightmare for one generation into a nightmare for the next. It is an inter-generational nightmare for which responsibility fundamentally rests with the State and the various companies. The underlying issue underpinning all this is that the State is still refusing to take full responsibility for this crisis even though it was the State that created the flawed standards and failed to police them and that came up with flawed remediation schemes which we were warned about at the time. Let us remember this is not just glorious informed hindsight but we had some of these arguments at the time. None of this is the fault of the homeowners yet they are still paying for this every single day. We would not be here debating this today if the ordinary people affected had not got organised, demonstrated and forced the Government kicking and screaming to take action but now we have to say that the action has to be appropriate and measure up to the latest scientific evidence and be adaptable to the latest scientific evidence. In the water charges movement we had a slogan, probably the most popular slogan of the movement, which was "No way, we won’t pay". That should be the guiding light here as well in terms of the cost being put on individual homeowners who bear no responsibility whatsoever. It is not their fault; they must not be forced to pay financially, emotionally, psychologically and in the massive disruption to their lives. It is not right for all this to be put on them. It is the State and the private companies who are responsible and they should pay not ordinary homeowners.

I move amendment No. 1: To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following: "notes that: — the Defective Concrete Blocks Grant Scheme (DCB Scheme), which provides grants to help those affected by defective concrete blocks to remediate their homes, is underpinned by the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks Act 2022 (2022 Act); — over 3,500 homeowners are now at various stages of the DCB Scheme, and will be supported with grants for 100 per cent of eligible expenditure up to a maximum cap of €462,000 per household, and this represents a 10 per cent increase in the maximum cap since the DCB Scheme launched in 2023; — more than €336 million has been spent on the DCB Scheme to date, with a commitment to more than doubling the level of funding for 2026 to €175 million, and to continue higher investment levels over the entire period of the National Development Plan 2026-2030; — the DCB Scheme is actively helping homeowners to rebuild their homes, allowing them to move on with their lives; — over 500 homes have been fully remediated to date, with approximately 750 more currently at various stages of construction; — additional counties continue to be added to the DCB Scheme, clearly showing the Government's commitment to help all those affected by the legacy defects caused by defective blocks; — the legislation refers to I.S. (Irish Standard) 465:2018, the Standard which provides for the assessment, testing and categorisation of damaged buildings incorporating concrete blocks containing certain deleterious material, which was published in November 2018, and the 2018 version of the Standard did not require any testing of foundations as there has never been any evidence of damage to foundations, and the DCB Scheme and the underpinning legislation make no provision for such testing; — in November 2021, as Ireland's official standards body, the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) was tasked by the Government with a special review of the concrete Standard, this review started in March 2022, and has been conducted by the TC 63 Concrete Blocks Committee of the NSAI, membership of this Committee included representatives of the concrete industry, Engineers Ireland, the Geological Survey Ireland, homeowner action groups, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the Housing Agency; and — a new revised Standard, I.S. 465:2026, was recently published by the NSAI on 2nd June, 2026, and the revised Standard is based on new research in the area, it entails quite significant changes from the previous Standard in that, under the new Standard, almost all houses with defective concrete blocks would be demolished, and furthermore, the Standard provides for the testing of the foundations of each house in case they may be found to be affected at some point in the future, notwithstanding that there are no current cases of damage to foundations; and agrees that: — aspects of the changes entailed by the new Standard require detailed consideration in terms of the DCB Scheme, and could entail significant financial implications for the State if adopted under the DCB Scheme; — the 2022 Act requires that the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage shall, on the publication of the revised Standard, undertake a review of the legislation, the Act also requires that, not later than three months after the completion of the review, the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas of their findings and conclusions resulting from the review, and it is intended that this formal review of the DCB Scheme will be initiated by the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage shortly; — existing DCB Scheme participants who have already received their determination under I.S. 465:2018 will have the choice to continue with their works; — the review will focus, as per the provisions of Section 51 of the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks Act 2022, on the operation of the Act in the first instance, with all matters relating to the introduction of I.S. 465:2026 and its interaction with the DCB Scheme being considered as part of the review, and this will include the matter of foundations; and — the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage will consider all implications of the new I.S. 465:2026, and make recommendations to the Government on any proposed changes to the DCB Scheme as soon as possible.". I would like to thank the group involved in bringing this motion to the House today. The case is well made by Deputy Charles Ward, in particular. No one has lived this experience the way he has. No Member of this House can say they have lived and breathed this issue the way he has, having personally experienced it, so I completely appreciate the points and sentiments made. That is no disrespect to Deputy Murphy, in that his point is made as well but I wanted to say at the outset that Deputy Ward has lived this and can speak about it with authority. The standards were just revised on 2 June. We have to rely on the science that we have. There are mixed messages. On the one hand Deputy Murphy is saying the science is faulty. Deputy Ward is saying he has full faith in the science and the scientists. We have to decide whether we trust the science and the evidence we have as per the revised standards or not. If I can give a shred of comfort, despite the fact we are proposing an amendment, the Minister has committed to reviewing the Act as quickly as possible. I do not have an exact timeline for that but it will be reviewed as quickly as possible because, as the Deputy said, new evidence is always emerging. Today's motion sets out a number of matters relating to the recently released national standard. I will do my best in the time I have to address as many as I can. As the debate progresses, I am sure there will be time at the end to address further issues during the time allocated for concluding remarks. First, I would like to emphasise the Government recognises the distress experienced by thousands of homeowners caused by the use of defective concrete blocks in their homes. My Government colleagues and I are absolutely committed to ensuring that all such homeowners are provided with the right assistance to remediate their homes to allow them to move on with their lives. The publication of the new standard is welcome. The Deputies will be aware that in November 2021 as Ireland's official standards body, the National Standards Authority of Ireland was tasked by the Government with a special review of the previous standard. This review started in March 2022 and has been conducted by the TC63 concrete blocks committee of the National Standards Authority of Ireland. Membership of this committee included representatives of the concrete industry, Engineers Ireland, the Geological Survey Ireland, homeowner action groups and the Housing Agency. The Department also participated in this group during the full period of its deliberations on the revision of IS 465: 2018. The State also funded the required independent research that contributed significantly to the review of the standard. My Department remains in regular contact with those affected and we continue to work to listen to homeowners as we keep the scheme under review to identify where we can improve how it operates. The level of commitment shown by this Government to affected homeowners is clearly shown by our actions over the past few years. Principally these relate to the funding we have provided and the way we have extended the scope of the scheme as and when needed. Finally, there is the very real and practical way in which we monitor how the scheme is working within the framework of the legislation set down by the Oireachtas and how we adapt to changing circumstances to improve the scheme for homeowner participants on a continuous basis, including making amending legislation in the Houses last year. Over 3,500 homeowners are now at various stages of the DCB grant scheme and will be supported with grants for eligible expenditure up to a maximum cap of €462,000 per household - this represents a 10% increase in the maximum cap since the scheme launched in 2023. More than €336 million has been spent on the scheme to date and Government funding for this work continues to be provided as and when required on an annual basis, with a record €175 million allocated to fund the scheme in 2026 - that is more than double the amount allocated to the scheme last year and reflects in the increase up take in the grant scheme. Over 500 homes have been fully remediated to date, with approximately 750 more currently at various stages of construction. When the current grant scheme launched in 2023 it contained four designated local authority areas. In 2024 Sligo County Council was added to the scheme and this year parts of Fingal County Council and Wexford County Council were added to the scheme. Parts of Meath County Council and Carlow County Council will also shortly be added to the scheme. Following the commencement of various parts of the defective concrete block (amendment) Act 2025 , the Minister, Deputy Browne, adopted regulations in February and June that provided welcome improvements to the grant scheme. The February regulations allowed homeowners who had suffered construction inflation to apply to the scheme for an increased grant, which resulted in them receiving additional funding to remediate their homes. The June regulations operationalised further improvements, including a key change to allow certain homeowners apply to the scheme to enable them to build a new property adjacent to their defective home and remain in it until the new home is completed. This has provided welcome relief for families who have homes adapted for the needs of members of the household. These regulations also recognised that there are many affected homes that are attached to other affected homes, such as semi-detached properties. Prior to this change, if one of the two attached dwellings did not meet the scheme damage threshold, it could not proceed to obtain a determination from the Housing Agency. The regulations provide a route for this cohort of applicants and provide a pathway for them to receive a determination under the grant scheme. The point is there have been adaptations and amendments since the grant scheme was first introduced. The current grant scheme was designed in accordance with the prevailing scientific evidence available at the time. With the publication of IS 465:2026 we have the most up-to-date science available that will help shape changes to the grant scheme following a review of the operation of the 2022 Act. This requirement is contained in section 51 of the Act. It requires the Minister for Housing must initiate a review within three months of the completion of the review of the national standard, I.S. 465:2018, and that within months of the completion of the review he shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas with his findings and conclusions of the review. I understand the urgency of this review for homeowners. Officials in my Department have already begun preparation work that will assist the review. A request for legal advice was submitted to the Attorney General's office and it has provided initial advice on the implications of I.S. 465:2026 for the grant scheme, with further advice expected in the coming weeks. The initial advice has indicated current scheme participants can continue to proceed with their works under the determination given to them. I emphasise that the review will focus, as per the provisions of the 2022 Act, on the operation of the Act in the first instance. All matters relating to the introduction of IS 465:2026 and its interaction with the grant scheme will be considered as part of the review of the 2022 Act. This will include the matter of foundations. I appreciate that naturally there has been significant focus on the foundations issue arising out of the publication of the revised standard. My understanding is that there were a range of views submitted to the NSAI regarding the impact or otherwise on foundations in the medium to longer term. Until this important review is complete it would be premature for me to speculate on exactly what changes may be required to the grant scheme with regard to foundations or indeed any other aspect of the scheme. I want to ensure that, as we now have the most up-to-date science, proper time and consideration is given to understanding how this new knowledge impacts the scheme and how we can best use it to assist applicants to the scheme. I am very much aware also of the very real concern out there among homeowners who wish to have clarity and certainty about how their sometimes unique sets of circumstances will be catered for going forward. A balance will have to be struck between a robust and comprehensive review and the need to have this done in a timely manner that pays due respect to the real concerns of homeowners. My Department has been working closely over the past few weeks since the publication of IS 465:2026 with the designated local authorities, the Housing Agency and the homeowner liaison officer. A number of meetings have taken place to assess the potential immediate impact of the revised standard on scheme participants. Communications will issue shortly from my Department to update homeowners in detail, where appropriate, on where they stand following the IS 465 revision. This Government has always committed to following the science when it comes to the defective concrete blocks scheme. The approach I have outlined in my speech is once again clear evidence of this. I conclude by thanking the National Standards Authority of Ireland for the time and effort that went into the new standard. I specifically acknowledge the efforts of the committee members and acknowledge that this voluntary work was time-consuming and difficult. That outlines the current situation. The new standards have just been published. The potential impact is still being realised but, as has been the case since the grant scheme was introduced, we have always amended and adapted it and introduced new measures and provisions. If it is necessary to do so again, we will do that, but the Minister has committed to reviewing the Act as quickly as possible and bringing that report to the Houses.

I have huge sympathy for the people affected by this in Donegal, Mayo, Clare, Limerick and other areas because I live in an area where we had the blight of pyrite. So many housing estates in our area were affected because the quarry was situated there. It did not regulate itself and there was a lack of Government regulation. Thousands of people were impacted by this and I campaigned on it and held public meetings on it over the years. This is slightly different but the principle is the same, namely, developers have been allowed to do whatever they want. Any time there are building defects they are not made to pay and it is often the State that pays. That is a political decision by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the other parties that have been in power with them. This is quite a technical motion but the basics of it are that people are in a situation where they do not know whether what the Government is providing is going to work and whether it will be enough. They cannot be the people who are left paying for this because of a lack of government regulation of developers. We know the history of the Minister of State’s party in particular, including the Galway tent and all that. The lack of regulation stems from that. Since the last motion was put on this issue I understand the number of homes affected by the defective blocks could rise to 20,000. That is up from the 9,500 mentioned at the housing committee last year. Only 435 houses built with defective concrete blocks, or 13% of the homes, have had remediation works and the State-funded scheme to address the situation has not been sufficient. At the time of the last motion the standards that were used to determine remediation under the scheme were being revised and reviewed. People are essentially being asked to make a decision on retaining or changing a foundation based on uncertain grounds and a complete absence of long-term knowledge. This motion is asking for a full independent review of the standard and in particular wants the remediation scheme to acknowledge this uncertainty. The State has a responsibility to these homeowners. It cannot be a one-and-done situation. The State must provide long-term supports for those affected and it requires a long-term commitment from this Government. I will mention the experience of people of with pyrite in their houses in many counties. The Minister might clarify something about the Pyrite Remediation Board. It was going to finish this November. That cannot happen. As recently as yesterday I was in a home in my local area. The woman who lives there is a teacher and has owned it for 20 years. She bought an affordable home and it is still cracking. There are cracks appearing in the walls and ceilings and there are holes. There is movement of the home. The assessment she had done – this is a real problem – indicated the house had pyrite level 1, which is not enough to be fixed under the remediation scheme, whereby a house must have at least pyrite level 2. There are thousands of people in this situation where there are homes that are not going to be fixed by the scheme. What are they meant to do? Obviously they cannot sell the homes. The engineer who did the assessment also said there were huge levels of shoddy workmanship and shoddy building practices. The company that did those homes has moved on, with a new name I believe, as they do. It is building away and profiteering from the housing shortage. I do not know the figure but I know people in my local area who have been - diagnosed is not the right word - assessed as having pyrite level 1. They have not been able to avail of the scheme. Somebody has to fix their houses. It is the fault of the developer and the State for not having the building regulations in place that pertain in most advanced capitalist countries. They are just not in place in Ireland. According to the reply to a parliamentary question that I asked, the pyrite remediation scheme has fixed 2,932 homes. That was due to campaigns by residents. It was not the Government waking up one morning and saying, “We should do the right thing.” It was a campaign of public meetings in my own area, petitions, meetings with the council and meetings with politicians. That was the case in other areas as well. There were protests outside the Dáil before I was ever a TD. It was the residents who had to campaign. In fairness, the pyrite remediation scheme worked very well for the residents I spoke to, who were at level 2 and were able to get their whole home fixed and accommodation sorted out. Kudos for that, but it is leaving out people whose homes were said not to be sufficiently damaged. However, those homes are still heaving and there is still movement. It should not cost as much as it would to fix a house from scratch, or anything like that, but they need to be fixed. I also want to raise the other building regulation issues that have arisen. I have been contacted by people in apartments in Ashtown who have had a levy put on their management fees in order to pay to fix fire safety defects. The residents, who probably paid hand over fist for the apartments, are being levied to pay to fix fire defects. They have applied to the Housing Agency under the statutory remediation scheme, but they had to go to TDs to ask if we can also push to see if they can get any reimbursement. What is the story? It is bad enough that they have to raise the money to get it fixed and that they are having difficulty getting reimbursed. I am sure there are several schemes that the housing Department is involved in, but the fact there are schemes like that shows that there also has to be some scheme for the possibly hundreds of homes that did not have sufficient pyrite for it to be fixed fully under the remediation scheme. I want to send my solidarity to all of those affected by the defective concrete blocks issue. I have seen first-hand the impact it has on people's health. Where there is damp and dust, anyone with an asthmatic or respiratory condition could testify that it has made it much worse, but there is also the issue of dealing with a crumbling home. The home is the one safety and security people have in their lives. To see this constantly happening to the adults, children and teenagers affected is unbelievable. When are we going to hold building companies to account in this country? Light-touch regulation or no regulation at all is what happened here. It led to these situations where quarries were not regulated and, therefore, mica, pyrite and all of these issues have developed. To allow builders to build and move off, and to then have the residents themselves pay for safety issues in apartments, is completely out of order. It is beyond time that this was dealt with. I fully support the motion.

When you read the book Defects written by my colleague, Deputy Eoin Ó Broin, you realise that the decisions that led to this absolute disaster emanated from this Chamber. Again and again over the years, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments and Ministers were challenged about the regulation of the building and construction industry. Again and again, they failed to properly regulate and oversee that industry, and we will pay a devastating cost for generations. As has been said, last night, we learned from Chris Brough, the head of Petrolab, an expert who is testing these concrete blocks, that he estimates the number of houses that will be affected is going to be over 20,000. I believe that is a very conservative estimate. The cost to the Exchequer will not be what the Taoiseach, Deputy Micheál Martin, said, which is €3.6 billion. It will be over €9 billion, and I believe that is a conservative estimate. We are going to be haunted by this for generations because of the utter political failure. Where we are at now is on a scale with the bailing out of the banks and the bondholders. That is the impact this will have. It goes deeper. I live in the epicentre of this. My friends, my family and my neighbours are utterly devastated. Can we imagine it? The biggest purchase of your life is your home, the roof over your head. You commit to it with a mortgage for years and years. It is your castle, your pride and joy. All your memories, everything, are built around that. For a long time, I have seen the utter devastation of the impact and cost of the decisions that were made in this Chamber, the neglect that took place in this Chamber, and the relationships that people who are in this Chamber had with people who were building and manufacturing. It reached its apex during the Celtic tiger. That is when so many of these homes were built utterly recklessly. I want to be very clear, although it has been said already. The Government wants to move on. It wants to say that it is on top of this: “See that protest with 20,000 people. We have all moved on from that now.” To be very clear, it is just the beginning of the realisation of the scale. There are housing estates in Donegal near my home area where only 10% or 15% of the whole estate is being rebuilt. All of those houses will have to be rebuilt. Tens of thousands of properties will have to be rebuilt. It will be a massive amount of money that will impact us for generations, thanks to people in this Chamber who made those decisions.

I thank Deputy Charles Ward for bringing forward this enormously important motion, but also for inviting Sinn Féin and other Opposition parties to co-sign it, which we did with enormous enthusiasm. It is deeply disappointing that the Minister has tabled the amendment. In fact, what it says to me is that he is not listening to homeowners in the affected counties. What Deputy Ward and others have put in the motion is eminently reasonable. It is to encourage further scientific clarity to support homeowners. The gap between the Government's rhetoric on the scheme to date and the lived reality of affected homeowners is growing ever wider. The numbers do not lie. It is eight years since the Government took a decision to introduce a defective concrete blocks scheme, six years since the first applications were received, four years since deeply problematic, controversial legislation for a renewed scheme was rushed through this House and three years since that scheme opened for applications. How many homes have been fully remediated in that time? According to the Department, the most recent update from May is 527. In eight years, only 3,500 homes have applied, and about half of those have been approved. Why? This motion goes to the very heart of it. It is because of the uncertainty underpinning the science and the fact that it is not 100% redress. I spoke to a woman with a modest home in County Clare that needs a full demolition and rebuild. She had to find an additional €80,000 to cover the cost of her home, and that is not an unusual case. Of course, there is the ongoing bureaucracy and delay in decisions. I am also deeply disappointed that the Minister is not able to give us a timeline for the review. This review is crucial to fix the many aspects of this broken scheme. We need the Minister to tell us when the review will be, who it will be led by, what the terms of reference will be and what the outcomes will be. Without a timeline, we are going nowhere. This motion is sensible and reasonable. The defective concrete blocks scheme is utterly broken and needs urgent reform, but there is simply no urgency whatsoever from the Government. That is not a surprise. The entire history of the Government dealing with building defects has been a lack of ambition and urgency. A case in point is that we still do not even have the underpinning legislation for the redress scheme for Celtic tiger era building defects. We were promised it would be introduced at the start of this year and be passed before the summer, with the Minister saying he hoped people would be able to apply for that scheme by the end of 2026. The legislation has not even been written yet. Deputy Coppinger is right; the two schemes for interim fire safety works and retrospective repayments are not working. Not a single retrospective payment has been paid to date, and only three schemes out of approximately 200 have got into the interim fire safety. It is utterly broken and needs change but this Government is not listening. However, I commend this motion to the House.

I welcome Deputy Ward's motion and am delighted to be able to sign it. There is no doubt that huge credit is due to people like Professor Paul Dunlop and his colleagues at Ulster University, as well as Members of this House, including members of my own party such as Deputy Mac Lochlainn and others who have led the charge along with Deputy Ó Broin in relation to this area here. The reality is that the Government has got this wrong. For many years, we have stood in this House and in committees and told the Government it is analysing the wrong problem and that, as a result, it is coming up with the wrong solutions. Now, the penny has dropped. The international evidence has been accepted and the standards have been updated. However, there are now many people in my county and other counties who have been told the remedy was something flawed. Outer leaf was nonsense, partial demolition was nonsense and downgrading of the assessments was absolute nonsense, but the Government refuses to listen over and over again. In the middle of all this, as we are talking about blocks in houses and costs and all the rest, there are human beings and families who are living in these situations. The Government continues with the misery, pain and hardship because it still will not recognise what needs to be done here. We need a full 100% redress scheme - an end-to-end scheme such as the one we in Sinn Féin put forward to the Government many years ago. For six, seven or eight years, we have been telling Government that the people of Donegal, Clare, Mayo and right across the west coast and beyond deserve the same rights as those who had it on the east coast, who got 100% redress and an end-to-end scheme. The reality is that the Government wants to put its head in the sand and hope this will go away, but it will not. No matter what tinkering the Government does with this scheme, it is not going to work for many people because they do not have €50,000, €60,000 or €70,000 under their mattress; it does not exist. There are people at an age in life who should never be asked to manage rebuilding their home. Why? Because it was not their fault. It was the Government's fault. As Deputy Mac Lochlainn said, it was the Government's fault because it cosied up to builders and developers and filled its pockets down in the Galway tent, allowing for no regulation. That has caused havoc in my county. It has destroyed the lives of people. Now that the Government has finally seen sense with regard to the standards, it should please listen to the experts, the people on the ground and the Opposition when we tell it to stop with the tinkering. We need a 100% redress scheme, we need an end-to-end scheme and we need to end this misery once and for all.

Hear, hear.

I thank Deputy Ward for bringing forward this motion. It is no surprise that I and my colleagues are very happy to support it. It is very important we all work together to tackle this. However, the Government is still not listening; it is not hearing what is being said. That is the great tragedy of all this. Since we started this nearly 12 years ago - or more than that - on the Erris peninsula in Mayo, the Government has not listened. If it had listened, we would now have a 100% redress scheme and many people would have their homes and lives rebuilt. I cannot understand why it is inflicting this cruelty on people through no fault of their own. This was negligence of Government; it was a lack of regulation. Now, we see all kinds of other things where we are told regulations are too strict and we need to deregulate things. My God, there is a human cost to this as well as the monetary and opportunity costs. Yesterday, Dr. Chris Browne and Professor Paul Dunlop - I do not know where we would be without them and their colleagues in Ulster University who have brought forward the science on this, because the Government has not done it - presented the cost as being estimated at €462,000 per property for 20,000 properties, which will be at least €9.2 billion. That is what is coming out of taxpayers' pockets to do this. There has not been any proper attempt to recoup some of that money from anywhere else, as was done in Wales, as Dr. Browne explained to us yesterday, where there was a division of the responsibilities and how the redress funds were set up. It has not been set up like that here but the decisions have to be based on the science. The other very important thing which came up yesterday was foundations. We have said all along that foundations have to be tested. For God's sake, Engineering Ireland has told the Government that. It cannot sign off on properties where the foundations have not been replaced. People cannot afford the gaps that are there. Deputy Doherty spoke about the gaps of €80,000 or whatever, but there are gaps of up to €100,000 that people are asked to find to pay for the Government's negligence on this. The off-ramping situation also has to be looked at in order to be able to speed up the testing.

Thousands of homeowners affected by defective concrete have spent many years living with uncertainty in their homes. They have constantly worried every time there is a storm whether their house is going to survive, and I have helped some of them as they navigated the inadequate remediation options. I have watched as they have become experts in what is destroying their homes. When they finally get approval for a scheme, they are left with decisions on whether the existing foundations should be retained or not, or whether they can even afford to get the foundations removed on top of all the other costs involved in a so-called 100% redress scheme. In the Minister of State's amendment, he states that 3,500 homeowners are now at various stages of the DCB scheme and will be supported with grants for 100% of eligible expenditure with a cap. In his opening statement, there was no mention of 100% redress, and I have yet to meet anyone going through this scheme who has not had to pay tens of thousands out of their own pockets to fix or rebuild their homes. The Minister of State also said the DCB scheme is actively helping homeowners rebuild their homes, allowing them to move on with their lives. Has he gone out to meet these people? The process they have had to go through on a rebuild is not that simple. I have met them and they actively cannot just move on with their lives; it is not that simple. They have had to spend years fighting the system and many hours learning what it is that is destroying their homes, and they have had to beg and borrow in order to rebuild their homes. The mental scars they have been left with mean they cannot just simply move on. The Taoiseach promised 100% redress and he has let the people down. The Government talks about changes and that a new standard could entail significant financial implications, but those who are actually responsible should be held to account. The homeowner should never have to be the fall guy when they are already the victim, but of course, it is easier to lay it all in the hands of families who just want to live in a home that is safe and secure. Does the Government even care that they have to borrow? Some couples I have met are in retirement and cannot get a loan. At a time in life when they should be enjoying the time they have, they are spending it in constant worry. There are families out there living in crumbling homes and homes affected by fire safety regulations who have no choice but to continue living there until they fall down, because of the failure of this Government to make them feel they can rebuild with a 100% redress scheme and move on with their lives. We have repeatedly raised this issue with successive Governments for years now. I have attended protests over the years with those in Clare who are affected. The light-touch building regulation, poor oversight of construction products and the reckless practices of some manufacturers, builders and developers have left thousands of homeowners with the devastation of crumbling or unsafe homes. They did not ask for this, and it is time the Government gave a genuine, 100% redress scheme delivered by the State from end-to-end. The standard IS 465:2026 is welcome and should be included. Professor Paul Dunlop has to be commended for this. I commend Deputy Ward on the motion.

I commend Deputy Ward on bringing forward this motion here today. The reality is that we are here because of the light touch regulation of Government and the practices of quarries and those who developed the concrete products used through the boom across many parts of the country. In my own constituency in Sligo, we have hundreds of houses that have been affected, and it has also spread to other areas. It is not just the counties on this list. It is important to recognise there are houses outside of it and people in other communities that are also affected. I spoke to some people in a housing estate. They can see the issues, they are talking about them and they have spoken to the county council. They are afraid to tell their neighbours they have this problem because everybody is frightened of what impact it is going to have on the value of their home and that of the other houses built around them. The worry all this causes is devastating. That worry is compounded by the Government having refused to put in place a scheme that will actually give 100% redress. I welcome the changes in the new regulations, where we now see that there is at least a recognition it may not be mica or pyrite in some of these houses. It may be other minerals causing these issues. I know of a number of cases where tests were done. I am thinking of two houses in particular. The first test said those houses had mica, while the second said they had none. They are going off now for a third test to see what the situation is. If the result again states there is nothing, then these people will be back in a situation where they do not comply with the standards. We have got serious issues here with many people who have serious problems. The other issue is that it is not just blocks in many cases. It is other concrete materials, including the foundations. I welcome that this aspect is now going to be examined and will be part of the scheme. For years, however, we have been saying this, and the Government has refused to listen. The reason the Government has refused to listen is because it wants to continue to back away from the problem it created. The Government created this problem through light-touch regulation and the cosy relationship there was with the people who provided these products. The builders, who in so many cases are innocent, bought the products in good faith and put them into the houses. Who was left to foot the bill? Only the householders. We need to see a proper scheme put in place to give people at least some sense that the Government has their backs in these circumstances.

I thank Deputy Charles Ward for bringing forward this motion and for giving us the opportunity to co-sign it, which, as my colleague said, we were more than pleased to do. I have been dealing with the legacy of the Government’s soft touch or, indeed, non-existent regulation since I was elected. The core point here, and this is the thing that is very often lost, most especially on Fianna Fáil Ministers but also on the Government in general, is that my constituents in north County Dublin did absolutely nothing wrong. They bought their homes. They made what is the biggest investment of their lives in good faith. They are not engineers. When the builder told them that the house was up to scratch, they expected that it was going to be up to scratch. For decades, thousands of them have endured their homes crumbling. Can you imagine the trauma of not feeling safe in your home? It is the one place where you should have a right to feel safe and secure. While the lads who were in the Galway tent will sail away off into the sunset, happy, rich and benefiting from the sale of those homes, the people they left behind will deal with the trauma for generations. Homeowners in Lusk are now being told they will have to pay for another test to get a green certificate, when they were told back in 2013 that they had to wait three years and would then get their green certificate. They are not getting it now. They have to get another test that is, potentially, going to cost them €2,500. This is never-ending. These people have been dealing with this situation now for 20 years. They bought their homes in 2003 and, within a couple of years, those houses started to crumble. The problem is never going to end unless the Government is prepared to deal with it. Likewise, Fingal was only admitted to the new scheme this year and already people are being told that this scheme is not fit for purpose. I ask the Minister of State to please withdraw the Government’s obnoxious amendment and listen to the people, and their representatives, who are dealing with this issue. I also ask him to acknowledge the role of his party, the Galway tent, its cosy relationship with developers and all that has happened, and to have the decency to say sorry to people and to make proper amends. A 100% redress scheme should mean 100%.

On behalf of the Social Democrats, I am very happy to speak to this issue today. I commend Deputy Charles Ward on the work he has done in bringing this motion to the floor of the Dáil and for his tireless work on this issue. We are very happy to co-sign this motion. I will also mention that my colleague, Deputy Rory Hearne, is unavailable today, which is why I am stepping in. He remains, as we do as a party, 100% committed to 100% redress and to communities, particularly along the west coast, so horrifically impacted by this issue. I also thank Deputy Ward and his team for the new research we were briefed on yesterday. Key to what we learned from that briefing, and it has come up a number of times already today, is that the County and City Management Association, CCMA, previously estimated at an Oireachtas committee that the number of homes affected by defective concrete blocks stood at 9,500. Members heard yesterday, however, that there could actually be up to 20,000 homes, and that is just the figure for private estate homes. This estimate excludes data from social housing, businesses and community buildings. In relation to the Government’s amendment, it is significant that a new revised standard, I.S. 465:2026, was published on 2 June. This new standard does allow for the testing of foundations, which is a key point of today’s motion and for the campaign to date, but the ball is now very much in the Government’s court. It now needs to review these new standards and make recommendations regarding any proposed changes. People will be postponing works while they wait on the outcome of these changes, and these are works which, in some cases, may have been in train for ten years. I also wish to speak about the administrative issues associated with the scheme. Deputy Ward has brought a number of cases to the floor of the Dáil. He has discussed how some constituents of his were assessed and, subsequently, their remediation options were downgraded from full demolitions. If the guiding principle of these assessments is I.S. 465:2018, and this is causing people to have to stay in unsafe homes or is not providing sufficient remediation for the demolition needed, then the standard itself must be re-examined. The State cannot allow people to stay in unsafe homes due to an outdated standard applying to assessments. As of April, only 13% of applicants had completed the remediation process, with 87% stuck in administrative limbo. This is where we now see the massive human cost of this scandal. Homes with defective concrete blocks are linked to a severely high prevalence of mental health conditions. Rates of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, complex post-traumatic stress disorder and suicidal ideation were “comparable to those seen in disaster-stricken and displaced populations”, as noted by one researcher in 2025. Researchers from Ulster University called for immediate, targeted mental health interventions for those affected by the issue of defective concrete blocks. There is extreme trauma in these communities and families that will have knock-on effects in these communities for years and generations if adequate supports are not provided to people in tandem with the appropriate and accessible redress schemes. People living in these homes have described their lives as existing and not living. I have had conversations with people living in homes affected by this issue. I have previously mentioned their names here in the Chamber; Ms Marti McElhinney and Dr. Áine Sperrin. They spoke about how frustrating the process of getting redress is, how families are unable to finance a demolition that has been approved, and how they are unable to find somewhere to stay in the meantime, while their towns are dotted with short-term lets. They told me stories about engineers telling families that their houses needed to be knocked, only for the scheme to only approve partial works. They told me how all these costs have to be paid upfront by families who simply do not have the money, how the communities affected by this crisis are some of the most impoverished in the country, how their houses are literally falling down around them, how the knock-on impact means that children suffer health issues connected to living in unsafe conditions, and that those with disabilities are stuck in crumbling buildings because they cannot get temporary accommodation that is accessible. As has been raised time and time again, the mental stress and strain of this impacts every single aspect of people's lives. We are not only letting them suffer; we are denying them the basic rights of health equality and adequate standards of living. Picking up on one of the points raised by those contributors, there is a dearth right now of alternative housing. This is because there has been stagnant social housing delivery for decades. There are estimates that 12,000 homes in County Donegal will need to be replaced. These people will need to be housed but, as is the case up and down the country, there is nowhere for them to go. There are very few homes to rent and fewer again of these are affordable homes. It is welcome that the scheme will be expanded to those who need it, but the problem of where people will live while works are ongoing will follow this scheme wherever it is available. This brings me to my next point, which is that side-by-side building should be allowed under the scheme. Currently, side-by-side building is not permitted under the defective concrete blocks, DCB, redress scheme. This would have allowed for families to remain on site and not bear the burden of rent or storage costs while works are ongoing. In the last five years, 300 homes have been built, and over 3,000 people currently trying to go through the scheme are stuck in this process. For children with additional needs, the disruption of moving home for the duration of the rebuild has been raised by parents as an issue. Finally, I want to speak to accountability because lax regulations and a hands-off approach from successive Governments has allowed cowboy developers to wreak havoc in communities across Ireland and essentially sowed the seeds for this scandal. Now, these cowboys are facing no consequences. These are builders who used defective materials, built dangerously, and then walked away, leaving families and children to suffer the consequences of their carelessness and pay for it with their homes. The vast majority are still building. A number of them are getting very high-profile public sector contracts. It seems there are no consequences. There is remediation in this scheme but it is not close to justice. I want to pick up on one line in the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan's statement, before the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, arrived. He said, "The level of commitment shown by this Government to affected homeowners is clearly shown by our actions over the past few years." It just does not ring true compared with every contribution that we are hearing here today. The countermotion the Government has put forward needs to be withdrawn. The Government needs to support this motion. It is a detailed, technical motion, put forward by an expert and the community he represents, who are experts in their own lives and their own situations. We need 100% redress.

I support this motion. I am thinking of the thousands of families across Ireland whose lives are absolutely devastated by the defective concrete blocks crisis. I pay tribute to Deputy Charles Ward for his relentless work on this issue. Since he came in through this door, he has gone at this issue every single week. He could not have worked harder on this. The people who elected him to Dáil Éireann must be very proud of the work he is doing, so well done and keep going. I have no doubt that the Deputy will keep going. I know he is trying to secure justice, accountability and full redress for the people who he represents in Donegal and throughout the country, so well done to him. I do not think this is just an issue in housing. It also has community-wide and education effects. As education spokesperson, I am aware that there are 16 schools in Donegal that we know of affected by this crisis, with seemingly a new report every week of it happening elsewhere throughout the country. If there are children in those schools who are living in a home that is affected by the defective blocks, then they go to school and it is the same situation, there is no let-up for that child. As my colleague said, this is affecting people's mental health. The foundations of their life are literally crumbling beneath them. If that is at home and at it is at school, it is utterly heartbreaking for those people. I am aware the Department of education has confirmed that it is engaging with the schools. I do not know if it engages with every single school because it did not give me that number. If we are spending State money on State buildings and they are defective, it is an utter waste of money and an utter disgrace. This is creating untold anxiety for parents, staff and the children in those buildings. This whole scenario showed a lack of oversight, regulation and accountability. Families have spent years campaigning for their experiences to even be understood and believed. The Government is quite slow on this. I would say people feel a little bit gaslit. I do not think that is good enough. I think it is a shame, when an expert tables a motion, that the Government comes with a countermotion. It is a waste. Why does the Government not just believe what is being said and why does it not listen and get this sorted? As my colleague said, cowboy builders have gone off, not a bother on them, and the State is left to pick it up. Do pick it up and do make it better for the people who are affected by this.

I welcome the visitors to the Gallery. As others have said, I pay tribute to Deputy Ward on the work he has done. Last October, my colleague, Senator Nessa Cosgrove, and I went to Donegal to visit some of the people who are affected by this humanitarian disaster. I thought I knew about defective concrete and that I could quantify in my head the actual scale of the humanitarian disaster but I cannot. I cannot help thinking, every time I think of defective concrete, of putting my hand on someone's house and feeling the wall come away like dust. I cannot help but think of the smell of the black mould in the kitchens we went to visit, the fact that the lights and electricity keep tripping because water is ingressing through everything, and that chimneys fall off people's houses and that is considered to be not that big a deal. I met somebody else who was concerned about their safety and their children's because the walls were crumbling so badly on their house that they are afraid that the roof would come down and crush them. The Government's amendment to the motion is tone-deaf. The amendment states that the scheme relies on IS 465:2018, which does not require testing of foundations. What is the point of pouring a brand new house onto a cracked foundation? It does not make any sense. The motion notes that 500 homes were remediated. Five hundred homes is a fraction. It is minuscule compared with the true level of need. We had a very informative presentation in the audiovisual room by Professor Paul Dunlop, who is an expert in this area. He quantified that at least 12,000 homes could be affected in Donegal at home. We have this in Limerick too. It is not just an issue in Donegal and the north west. We have this in Limerick city. I have had people in my constituency office in tears because they are living in semi-detached homes in Limerick city. As Professor Dunlop pointed out yesterday, defective concrete takes a lot longer to actually show up in areas like Limerick. A woman who came to see me, who is involved in the defective concrete campaign in Limerick, only had the defective concrete show up when she got an SEAI grant and got the walls pumped. When she got the walls pumped, that effectively showed all the cracks. The core issue remains, that the people who are suffering this humanitarian disaster are being treated as second-class citizens in comparison to the people who were equally devastated by pyrite in Fingal and on the eastern seaboard of the country. That is a fact and the core of the issue here. The legislation is too narrow. I cannot believe that people are still talking about mica, when the fact of the matter is that this is not just something that affects defective concrete blocks in houses but affects poured concrete and other building material. The core issue, as always in this country with anything during the Celtic tiger period, is the lack of any accountability because we know that, as well as the quarry owners, the political system was up to its neck in this. We have had a total regulatory failure. We have quarries which have and are manufacturing defective concrete and getting away with it. How has the State responded? It has responded, as it always does to victims of injustice, by forcing blameless citizens to prove that they are not lying, by bureaucratically downgrading their applications at the click of a mouse, and by passing the long-term risk back onto them. The State is effectively telling homeowners to rebuild their lives on top of foundations that we know contain pyrite and other sulphide materials, and it is absolute madness. You are talking about being penny wise but you are really being pound foolish. The standard that the Government is relying on is operating under conditions of material scientific uncertainty. There is no long-term evidence that these foundations will hold up over the next 30, 40 or 50 years. You cannot tell a family to build a home on a questionable foundation and just leave them to hold the legal and financial bag if the foundation fails a decade or more from now. We need an independent review of IS 465:2026, specifically considering how sulphites and pyrrhotite destroy foundations over time. We need to amend the defective concrete block scheme so no individual is ever forced to retain a foundation where engineering uncertainty exists. Homeowners must have an explicit, fully funded right to opt for a complete foundation replacement if there is reasonable doubt. We need to ensure that all residual structural risk remains with the State. If the State standard fails, then the State is going to have to pay because the homeowners cannot. This crisis was caused by a catastrophic failure of government regulation and a total lack of oversight in the quarrying sector, particularly from the Fianna Fáil Government of 1997 onwards. The State completely failed to protect the affected people. It is now time for the Government to stop the ducking and half measures and actually deliver the 100% redress the families fundamentally deserve so that they can have peace of mind. I welcome every opportunity to speak on this issue. I commend Deputy Ward on his motion because what he is seeking to do is ensure the State assumes accountability for the risk of defective foundations in concrete homes. It is imperative that this burden does not fall on homeowners who cannot afford to pay the difference. We have a duty as legislators to listen to and reflect the views of the people we represent. The poor families who have been affected should not be expected or forced to bear the responsibility and cost required to remedy the problem when they have gone out of their way to secure a home for their family and made that purchase in good faith, with an expectation that the home they live in will not fall down on top of them. Homeowners should be able to feel safe in their homes. They should have confidence in the structure of the dwelling they live in. These are relatively basic things. Invariably, when homeowners like these poor people are forced into some sort of rebuild, they have one shot to make it work. They must not be forced to put blood, sweat and tears, and an insane amount of money, into rebuilding their homes only for them to be rebuilt essentially on quicksand. Forcing them to do so is absolutely bananas because once a decision has been made to rebuild, one cannot turn back the clock on it. That is why this is really important. Through detailed scientific research, it is now known that the problems with defective concrete can be traced to an internal sulphite attack. It is clearly apparent that, with the distribution of this defective and highly damaging concrete material, numerous EU and Irish concrete regulations were violated. It is of critical importance that these regulations be enforced to prevent the status quo from continuing. As other speakers said, we do not just have defective concrete in homes. There is defective concrete in secondary schools in Limerick. We need the Government to address this by commissioning an independent international review of the scientific basis of IS 465:2026 because we need a greater understanding of how and why this entered the market in the first place. In my city, Limerick, we reckon 2,500 properties may be affected by concrete defects and deterioration. We need a different approach to this, and that is why I am really disappointed by the Government amendment.

I thank Deputy Charles Ward for all the work he has done on this. What is the Government guilty of? I sat on the housing committee last term. It is on the record of that committee that I highlighted to the Minister, and all the various witnesses and so-called professionals brought in by the Department, the issues with blocks, foundations and the weight loads on foundations under the new regulations that you try to meet when rebuilding a house. How much has it cost to bring in all the people who have given the Minister the information? We brought in professors and people from all the different sectors to inform the Minister. Deputy Ward is like me. I am a block layer by trade. I have 35 years’ experience with something that none of the Minister’s professionals could actually even answer questions on when asked at meetings of the housing committee. I was able to do weight loads for them. They could not answer. Why has it taken so long and why have people been suffering? The Government is guilty. It takes so long to build houses in this country and so long to bring in redress. That is what it is guilty of. It cannot manage anything. It does not take advice from the people who can give it and who can speed things up. If you look at the record, you see the knowledge is available. For God’s sake, will the Government wake up and look at the facts? The information has been available for five or six years but the Government allowed all the families to be put through stress and anxiety, with them not knowing whether their houses would crumble down around them. The Minister sat on that committee with me, so he was present to hear what was put on record. Therefore, I do not even need to verify it. The minutes are available.

I congratulate Deputy Charles Ward on tabling this motion in the House. I am aware of the tremendous work he has done on redress and I want to acknowledge that here today. This motion goes to the heart of trust between the State and the homeowners affected by defective concrete. The defective concrete grant scheme allows foundations to be retained under IS 465:2026 but the research behind the standard has already found that minerals have been discovered in concrete, with early signs of internal oxidation and sulphate attacks. The State’s own evidence admits it does not know how these foundations will perform over time. The Government is asking families along the western seaboard, from Donegal down as far as Limerick, to take an irreversible decision to retain something that may have to be replaced in 15 to 20 years’ time. If the State sets a standard, the State must take ownership of the risk. Deputy Ward’s motion calls for three fair things: the publication of the evidence base behind IS 465:2026; homeowners to be given a clear right to opt for the full replacement of foundations, which is fair and the right thing to do; and the commissioning of an independent international review of the science. That is the right thing to do. I ask everybody in this House, even though Fianna Fáil has not attended the debate and only two Donegal TDs are here, to support this motion.

I thank Deputy Charles Ward and his group for putting forward this motion. Would anyone in the Dáil like to be one of the people living in the affected homes? That is the reality we are asking families to accept. We all know that buying a home is the biggest purchase most people will ever make. It is the biggest expense they will carry in a lifetime. More than that, a home is supposed to be a place of comfort, a place where, after a long day’s work, one can walk in the door and feel safe, secure and at peace. For many of the homeowners, that is not the case. Instead, they are going home to houses that are literally falling apart around them, with cracks in the walls and floors and shifting foundations. These are homes that no longer feel safe. While the physical damage to these homes is bad enough, we can only imagine the toll this is taking on people’s mental health, the stress, anxiety, sleepless nights and constant fear of what lies ahead. On top of all that, we are asking the families to make a permanent decision based on standards where even the science is still evolving. That is not fair and it is not right. Families did not build these homes incorrectly. They did not create the defective materials and they certainly did not write IS 465. The State chooses the standard. The State is asking people to rely on it and, if it is asking them to do that, it must stand over the standard completely. That means that where there is doubt, the benefit must go to the homeowner. It means that if there is any risk in retaining foundations, that risk cannot and must not rest on the shoulders of ordinary, hard-working families.

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an Teachta Charles Ward agus leis an bhfeachtas atá ann mar gheall ar defective blocks, agus de bharr an rúin atá os ár gcomhair faoi láthair. Communities have been battling for years in relation to the very basic premise that the house they have paid for should be of a standard that they can live in and that can stand. Communities have been battling for years in defence of the basic premise that the house they paid for should be of a standard they can live in and that can stand. Aontú has been solidly behind the campaign over the past decade. I have visited many homes in Donegal with Mary T. Sweeney and witnessed the devastation. We have held public meetings in Donegal about the issue. We have marched and spoken at demonstrations in Dublin. The truth is that families' lives have been absolutely destroyed by what has happened. Local authority buildings, public buildings and schools have been left in a situation where the blocks are crumbling around them. This has happened because of light-touch regulation by previous Governments. The fact that nobody has ever been held to account is at the heart of the problem. We have a system whereby the Government allowed light-touch regulation and then did not provide for any enforcement of any regulation. Therefore, there is a responsibility on the Government to ensure there is proper compensation and these homes are brought back to proper physical standards. I have no doubt but that there is a spatial element to this. If those defective blocks were in south Dublin, there is no doubt in my mind that the Government's approach to the issue would be significantly different. It would make sure that proper standards were in place and the proper financial supports were in place as well. There is definitely a Dublin regional bias in respect of this issue. The Government talks about 100% redress but house owners will tell you that there is a significant difference between the redress that has been achieved and delivering the change in the buildings themselves. This legislation is still making it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many people to come up with the necessary finance to pay for the work that is being done. It is not just happening in Donegal. It is also happening in Mayo, Clare and Limerick, and now Meath and Cavan have been brought in too. I ask the Government to sit down with the families and not to draw out the situation any further. I ask it to ensure there is proper investment and that the standards being used in rebuilding and redress are the standards that are scientifically appropriate, as ascertained by the campaigners. That is not the case at the moment and as a result, it is creating serious difficulties for families.

I thank Deputy Charles Ward for tabling this latest motion on behalf of families who are living in defective homes and who have waited years for help. They have got some assistance but not anything near what is needed. As I have said previously, the Deputy is meeting his mandate 1 million times over and I am happy to support him. This motion is important for families on the western and north-western seaboards but also for those in other counties, as we have increasingly found out. The motion references the lack of redress, but also specifically focuses on the scientific gaps in IS 465:2026, such as the lack of long-term evidence on sulphide-related deterioration and the impossible decision this places on homeowners when they are asked to make what are going to be irreversible decisions about the nature of their foundations and the works required when they have no way of knowing. The Government amendment attempts to pass the buck or put it down the road. It does not address the issues. It lists the spending commitments and the process reviews, but is still placing the burden on the families to carry the long-term risk of failures that they clearly did not cause. This has, as we know, nothing to do with snag lists or anything like that. It is about woeful incompetence that was not monitored by the Government. The review required under existing legislation is not the solution but a delaying tactic. We had years of weak oversight and a regulatory system that did not police the standards. Others have mentioned the cosy relationship between the State, sectors of industry and developers, which allowed the defective blocks to enter the market unchecked. We cannot put the burden on families when the coffers were filled for the companies and businesses, some of which have gone bankrupt. That money has long since been spent. The Government failed to enforce its own rules. This motion demands tangible action, an independent review and full transparency and that homeowners be allowed to choose the foundation replacement where uncertainty exists.

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an Teachta Ward. Bíonn sé i gcónaí ag caint faoin ábhar tábhachtach seo. Bím ag éisteacht leis agus cloisim an bród atá aige as Tír Chonaill. I have visited some of them in my own capacity since we last spoke about the issue in this Chamber. Some of the houses in the northern part of my constituency have faced concrete defects and other issues. I welcome the Deputy's motion, particularly in respect of IS 465:2026. Irish standards were set to protect Irish people. They should not be punishing them. We must also ensure full and fair redress and ensure that it keeps happening. What happened in my constituency, and as too often happens, was that developers and construction companies walked away, leaving areas that could not be taken in charge by the council and houses that were unreliable from a fire safety perspective to fall into degradation. After going into liquidation, such companies reopened under another name. It is not acceptable that these developers are off the hook while Irish families are paying the costs. Those responsible for the defective building work must be held accountable and stronger protections must be provided. I looked at the amendment to the motion. It refers to a review, but a review has been done. This is not new. I urge that the review come into action. I welcome the Minister of State's work on this issue. I hope that the Government will do that and help Deputy Charles Ward to fulfil his mandate to his constituents.

I sincerely thank Deputy Charles Ward for bringing forward this important motion. It is a reasonable motion. I acknowledge the work that has been done by people from the Government and the Opposition in securing the situation with IS 465:2026. Large sums of money have been put forward to help the affected families. I have spoken to many of them over the years. The one thing of paramount importance is the case-by-case study. In other words, I note that the motion brought forward calls for "an explicit entitlement for homeowners to opt for full foundation replacement where reasonable doubt exists as to future performance". That is reasonable. I have read the countermotion by Government. Of course, it states "notwithstanding that there are no current cases of damage to foundations" and then goes on to state the Government's position. If you look at this, it makes no sense whatsoever to not make allowances where foundations are deemed to be unsafe or unsure. It does not make sense to be giving people assistance to build a house on top of a foundation that might in the future weaken and not be of a proper standard. That is why this motion is reasonable. I highlight at this stage that tonight I am facilitating a Minister by pairing with him to allow him to do his work but only for that fact, I would be supporting this motion. It is a reasonable motion but I am unable to vote because I am facilitating a Minister in his work. I highlight the concern among people who find themselves in this awful situation. It is like leaving the handle go with the hatchet. The Government has recognised that this is a problem. Ignoring the fact that the foundations could also be a problem is inherently wrong.

I, too, compliment Deputy Ward, an Teachta Ward, for bringing forward this motion and for all the work he has done since he was elected and before he was elected. I also compliment na daoine in the Gallery, including Councillors Denis McGee and Joy Beard. Indeed, I also compliment the staff of Deputy Ward and the people and families who are affected. How many more times must they make the major journey to Dublin, Baile Átha Cliath, with their plastic bags? They come with knobs of concrete and they are like sawdust. It is quite obvious. The previous Government made efforts, but I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could decide to have a redress scheme for the blocks, mortar and walls, and forget the foundations. I have some experience. I am a plant hire contractor in foundational work and site work and everything else. The foundation is the most important part of anything, including the foundation of the families. This is so distressing to the families who have had to put up with this for so long now. It is distressing that the foundations are not included. It is just pure lunacy. We have standards and regulations, as we have in so many other areas in this country, but they are ignored. We have regulators for everything. They have fancy offices with a brass plate outside, a CEO and staff, but they do nothing. They are toothless, useless and fruitless in my opinion. There are many of them; we appointed another one last week. We appoint them every week and there are thousands of them now. What about the families? It is a noble intention for any person to build their own house and have a house for their family. It is the noblest intention in the world. Now people are forced to replace their homes because of the incompetence and blackguarding of a big company, which has been fined hundreds of millions in Canada, America and all over the world. However, we will not fine it here; not at all. We will put a 5% levy on the ordinary man trying to build a house to pay for this, instead of making the company pay. Everybody knows which one it is. I would be nearly afraid to speak the name, even with privilege. It is CRH. There are different names on the lorries going in and out, but CRH owns the lot because it has a monopoly. It is disgraceful and despicable. I have attended its AGMs here in Dublin a few times, not to cover mica issues but to cover countless other issues where it got away with blatant corruption. This is a shocking case of big business in the pockets of the big parties. I was in a party for long enough and I know how it works. That is the holy all of it. The families are left thrown to the wind. We will have investigations, more reviews and a motion here. It is just pass the parcel. We need to think of the families sleeping in their houses in fear. My daughter, Councillor Máirín McGrath, was in Donegal. Her colleagues up there brought her around and showed her the houses. They showed her housing estates that were empty, gan aon duine ansin. They had to move out. If this happened in Ukraine, we would be talking about it. No doubt we will find hundreds of millions to rebuild Ukraine and there will not be a word about it. There will be no questions asked, no reviews, no tests of the concrete and no anything else, but our own people do not matter. We know that our own families do not matter to this Government. I am not putting this personally to the Minister of State, who I know is a hard-working Minister of State, as is the Minister, Deputy Browne. However, what is going on is just not acceptable. It is time to lay it nakedly out there and support the families who home themselves; they did not ask anybody to home them.

I am glad to say a few words in support of Charles Ward's motion. He has raised it many times inside here since he was elected, as others have done. I cannot understand how this is taking so long to resolve. There has been quibbling about the foundation. It is only a day's work to put in a foundation. Often it is done much quicker than that if the concrete came - proper concrete - and it is organised on time. Something must have been lacking with Government regulations or if there was a regulator. Like all the regulators, maybe he did not want to be seen at all. For any regulator we are depending on, there is no account of him. He is either asleep or gone missing because all of the regulators we have are being paid for doing absolutely nothing. Building a home is the biggest venture that a young couple will ever put themselves through given the cost and worry involved in getting it up. It is terrible for people to find their homes are falling asunder like they are. The faster this is remedied, the better. I welcome the people from Donegal to the House. I know they have plenty of other things to do. It is a priority for them to ensure that the people with defective homes in Donegal are sorted out. When Bridie Gallagher sang a song about the homes of Donegal, we never envisaged that this would be happening to the homes after she sang that song that so many people were glad to listen to. The Minister of State should not put the people through having to come in here again. If it is down to the foundations and that is all that is at stake, just dig them out. It would not be a day's work to dig them out and order concrete and a few steel bars to build them up again. They will go off in a couple of days and people can start afresh. A house has to have good foundations when starting out. There is no point in taking chances and saving that amount of money. There is more time spent talking about them inside here and in that time a lot of them could be fixed. The people are worried. They have children and they are worried what will be the end of all this. Some of the houses have been done, but there are a lot more to be done. For God's sake, will the Government come out and sort it for once and for all? It is no bother for me to support the people of Donegal, but we should not be having to do this day after day.

I thank all Deputies for their contributions and for their genuine advocacy and work in this area. I recognise the real hurt and anger right across the country of homeowners who have been impacted by legacy defects as a result of defective concrete blocks. I want to put that on record. As the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, and the Minister, Deputy Browne, have said previously, the Government is committed to assisting homeowners who have been impacted by defective concrete blocks. We have provided significant funding to the scheme and we will continue to do so. We have also kept the scheme under review and have made changes to it as and when required to try to assist more homeowners. The statutory obligation placed on Government by the 2022 Act, arising from the publication of the new IS 465:2026 standard, will now be actioned as soon as possible and a review of the Act will get under way shortly. Importantly, the very large number of homeowners who have already received a determination and grant amount can continue with their works. The current enhanced defective concrete blocks grant scheme has been open for applications since 2023. The Government put it in place to assist homeowners to remediate damage caused by the use of defective concrete blocks. Notwithstanding that the current grant scheme contains improvements on the previous scheme, the Government has been mindful that the scheme requires monitoring and when changes are needed, they have been actioned. When it was recognised that construction inflation was presenting difficulties for homeowners, an increase in the grant scheme cap and rates was legislated for. This brought the overall scheme cap from €420,000 to a maximum of €462,000, along with an increase in the associated grant rates. The Government is committed to funding all eligible expenditure under the scheme. Originally, the estimated cost was more than €2.2 billion, excluding inflation, with an estimated 7,500 households impacted. I note the comments from Deputies here as to the scale of the challenge ahead. A review is ongoing, with the local government sector, of the numbers and of the impact of the new standard IS 465:2026. Furthermore, the changes to the scheme that the standard might necessitate could add further cost to the scheme. Therefore, Deputies will appreciate that the approach now being taken by Government to review the Act is a logical one. The publication of the revised IS 465 is the culmination of years of work in a complex and sensitive area that has real meaning and importance to thousands of households in many parts of Ireland. The Government is mindful of the very real concerns of affected homeowners who deserve the chance to be helped to fix their homes and to move on with their lives as much as possible. As the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, has said, the Department, in partnership with the local authority sector and the Housing Agency, will update homeowners in the near future in as clear and comprehensive a way as possible regarding what this new standard might mean for them. From listening to the debate, it is clear that one of the primary focuses is to address the issue of foundations. While the focus on foundations is absolutely understandable, the Department's communication will address a wider suite of issues raised in the weeks since the publication of IS 465:2026. Notwithstanding some of the genuinely articulated and personal cases that have been highlighted by Deputies, it is important to point out that the scheme is working for many. As of today, over 3,500 homeowners are at various stages of the grant scheme. Over 500 homes have been remediated, with another 750 at various stages of construction having notified the relevant designated authority of commencement. The Government realised at an early stage that homes affected by defective concrete blocks may not be limited to Donegal, Mayo, Clare and Limerick, and the 2022 Act provides a pathway for additional local authorities to seek designation under the grant scheme. Since 2023, Sligo and parts of the Fingal and Wexford County Council areas have been designated under the grant scheme. As the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, pointed out earlier, parts of Meath County Council and Carlow County Council will shortly be designated under the grant scheme. I am sure this will be welcome news for householders in those areas that have homes impacted by defective concrete blocks. At the end of 2025, the Minister, Deputy Browne, brought forward very important legislation, the Defective Concrete Blocks (Amendment) Act 2025. This Act contains numerous beneficial changes for homeowners in the grant scheme. The Minister operationalised the majority of this Act in February and June of this year. These regulations provided for additional funding to homeowners who were previously unable to avail of the uplift in the scheme cap and rates, which was a particularly important issue for many. Crucially, the regulations also provided for homeowners where either they or members of their family live in a home affected by defective concrete blocks that has been adapted for the needs of the resident living there. The Minister is aware that since the publication of the new standard, homeowners either already in the grant scheme or intending to apply to the scheme will have questions on what the new standard means for them. I emphasise that homeowners already in the scheme and undertaking works can continue with those works. Grant payments will continue to be made by local authorities so homeowners can complete their works. As some Members are aware, officials in my Department met members of the implementation steering group last week to provide an update regarding the scheme and the new standard, noting that the Department will issue guidance for local authorities and the Housing Agency on various categories of applicants to the scheme. At this meeting, members were brought up to speed on the review process and what it will entail. The group includes officials from the designated local authorities, the Housing Agency and the homeowner liaison officer, all of whom can assist homeowners with their queries. The Department met again yesterday with the group to focus on how best to keep homeowners informed of ongoing developments in a timely manner. Allowing the review to be undertaken and completed will be key to the success of the grant scheme. The 2022 Act, as set down by the Oireachtas, clearly identified the need for this review. The review will focus, as per the provisions of section 51 of the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks Act 2022, on the operation of the Act, in the first instance, in all matters relating to the introduction of IS 465 and its interaction with the grant scheme will be considered as part of the review. On completion, the Minister will make recommendations to the Government on any proposed changes to the defective concrete blocks scheme. Ensuring homeowners are treated fairly under the grant scheme has and will continue to be the focus of the Government. The Minister is well aware of the urgency of the review. He and his officials are working hard to ensure it is prioritised in a timely fashion. I will circle back to what I said at the outset. I totally understand and appreciate the impact defective concrete blocks have had on homeowners who have been impacted. Very real stories have been articulated by Members of this House. Of that, there is no doubt. I acknowledge everybody involved and their advocacy and work in this area.

I commend Deputy Charles Ward on his diligent and relentless campaigning on behalf of the tens of thousands of people affected by defective blocks. He is one of those people personally affected, along with tens of thousands of others. I commend all of those who work with him in the 100% Redress party, and all of those who have been affected by this issue, on their campaigning and their refusal to take this lying down. I am very glad to support the motion. In a way, I am also very glad that I do not have the expertise Deputy Charles Ward has. I have been trying to get educated by him on the issue. It is not something that has emerged in my constituency, at least so far, but I am aware of the consequences of the willingness by Fianna Fáil in particular, but also Fine Gael, to allow developers and people in the construction industry not to be properly regulated or controlled and for that to have devastating consequences on homeowners and renters, in particular with fire safety issues. Many tens of thousands of people are affected by buildings that were not built properly and have fire safety issues, which imposed costs and hardships on them. Some of that stuff is not over. I recently came across a new social housing development where, within months of moving in, people have damp, mould and so on all over the place and are having to fight to have those things addressed. This stuff is still going on, so there is a lot at stake on these issues. It is shocking that at least 20,000 householders are living in homes that are crumbling around their ears and which are now worthless. They worked hard for those homes and they are worthless. They cannot sell them. The Government seemed to be crowing about its redress scheme, but if I understand this correctly, the reason only slightly more than 3,000 people have applied for it is that the scheme is so inadequate, and the gap between the cost of remediating a home and what the Government is willing to give means that for huge numbers of people affected by this issue the scheme the Government is proposing is completely inadequate and will not allow them to remediate their homes. That means they are stuck in crumbling homes unable to deal with the consequences of something that was basically the responsibility of the Government and its failure to regulate cowboys - profit-driven, unscrupulous people - in the construction industry. On top of that, where people may try to rebuild their homes with an inadequate scheme, the Government is forcing them to build on foundations that may crumble in the future. Where people know that the material that could lead to that crumbling - the defective substances or substance that lead to these defects - are there but we do not know what will happen in the future, rather than giving those people the option to fully replace the foundations, the Government is insisting they build on foundations that could crumble. Why would the Government do that? First, the people have gone through having their homes crumble around them and become worthless and they have to rebuild them. Then they are being made build on foundations that could crumble again in the future, causing them anxiety, concern and all the hardship that would involve, in addition to the cost of doing that. It defies belief that the Government will not take on board what Deputy Ward is saying here, namely, that people should have the option to fully replace those foundations and, more generally, that the Government should be providing 100% redress from end to end to resolve this for all of those who have been affected by this terrible issue of defective concrete. The amendment the Government has put forward is extremely disappointing. It should withdraw it and take on board what Deputy Ward is very reasonably asking for to help the many tens of thousands of people affected by this scandal. There may be a lot more affected.

I thank my colleagues who stood with me today and those who took the time to go beyond the briefing material and the political framing and had the empathy to understand what families are living through on the ground. Before we vote, I want to speak plainly, not in a language of schemes, standards or reassurance, but in a language that explains what is happening to people on the ground. I have sat in homes where families are in this crisis, and I have heard things that have never appeared in reports. People are lying awake at night wondering if their home is safe. Parents are trying to hide this fear from their children. Families are trying to hold ordinary life together while carrying on in an uncertainty that they did not create. This is the reality. There is no data and there are no summaries and no briefing. It is reality. No homeowner or child caused this crisis, yet they are the ones that are carrying it. We are told the scheme is improving. We are told progress is being made, but uncertainty is still in people's homes. It is still at the kitchen table, and it is still in their lives. I ask the House one question. Who is carrying the uncertainty? It is not being carried in here. It has been carried elsewhere by the families, by the children. People who stood should never have been asked to carry this burden at all. Never should this have happened. I recognise that many Members will vote under party instruction, but this Chamber has also seen Members break that. I ask that safety and security, and the future of children and their families, be on Deputies' conscience when they are voting. They have to go back to their constituents when it is in their area, and tell them why they did not vote to help. I hope Deputies will realise in the years to come what has gone on and that we have a catastrophic situation on our hands. The responsibility for this cannot be ignored. The time is now. We have to address this. There is a choice before us, it is a responsibility we cannot keep avoiding: families or system. I am clear. The uncertainty does not belong in family homes. This belongs now to the State. It is the State that has a responsibility to carry this burden, not the families, the people who did nothing wrong or the children growing up underneath the shadow of the defective concrete. When the bell rings for the vote this evening, this House will decide something very simple: where the burden sits. That decision does not end with this vote; it begins there. I stand with the families, like all my colleagues in opposition today who have stood. I say to the homeowners that we are fighting for them night and day and we will not forget. I will not move the burden onto those who did not create it. I am asking this House to remember where the weight of this situation has occurred. The Government and the State have a responsibility.

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time this evening.