Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Dec 2022

Vol. 1031 No. 3

Defects in Apartments - Working Group to Examine Defects in Housing Report: Statements

Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (Deputy Darragh O'Brien)

I welcome the opportunity to once again address the House on the issue of the report of the Working Group to Examine Defects in Housing and to inform Deputies of the steps this Government is taking to provide support to homeowners who find themselves in a difficult situation through no fault of their own.

I thank Deputies across the House in this regard. We will sometimes have charged discussions or disagreements regarding policy, but on this issue, in the main, we have been able to work constructively together. The next phase is important. It involves moving to a Government decision, implementation and starting to help people to get their homes and their lives back together. I fully acknowledge the difficulties homeowners and residents of many apartments and duplexes are facing, and the stress caused when defects arise in their buildings and where there have been many incidences of failures and non-compliance concerns coming to light in apartment buildings. This is particularly the case with many of those built during the building boom.

Many of these are in my constituency. I know constituents, residents and friends who have been living with this awful situation. I said that as Minister I would grasp the nettle on this issue and that the Government would as well. We are doing this. For the information of the House, earlier this week I hosted a webinar with residents affected right across the country. We had more than 290 participants. I thank the Construction Defects Alliance, CDA, and the Apartment Owners Network, AON, for facilitating this meeting where I was able to directly answer questions from residents from across the country. I thought it was useful and I will continue to do this. I have committed to another session with residents in the first quarter of next year.

As I mentioned, thousands of residents across the country, and we estimate about 100,000 properties nationwide, including thousands of residents in Dublin Fingal, the area I represent, have been affected by issues such as construction defects or fire defects. I have worked and campaigned on this issue since the first day I came into the Dáil way back in 2007. In Opposition, when I was Fianna Fáil's spokesperson on housing, I called for a scheme to be put in place and for us to work together to help residents, not just to put their homes back together but to help them to put their lives back together. That is why, in the programme for Government negotiations, we sought and received a firm and clear commitment that the nettle of construction defects would be grasped and dealt with once and for all. This commitment was further supported by actions contained in the Housing for All policy.

In this regard, I established the working group to examine defects in housing. This working group was chaired by Séamus Neely, former CEO of Donegal County Council, and its membership included professionals from a range of backgrounds, including fire safety, engineering, architecture, chartered surveying and the legal and public sectors. In recognition of the importance of hearing the voices of those directly affected by this issue, two members of the group were nominated by the Construction Defects Alliance and the Apartment Owners Network. I take this opportunity to commend all those, including my officials, who worked so hard via the working group to prepare a most comprehensive report in what was a tight timeframe. The working group set its own terms of reference. I did not set a timeframe for it either. It concluded its work in an efficient and professional manner.

As I said, the working group set its own terms of reference and it focused specifically on fire safety, structural safety and water ingress defects in purpose-built apartment buildings, including duplexes, constructed between 1991 and 2013. I received the report of the working group at the end of July. Given the importance of its work, I did not pressure the working group into finishing the report sooner or speeding it up. It needed the time to consider the scope and scale of the issue.

The level of consultation and engagement that the working group undertook with stakeholders and interested parties here and abroad was extensive. As a result, the report is rich in data regarding the nature and scale of defects, as well as the cost of addressing them. Some 28,000 homes participated in a survey undertaken by the working group. As a result, for the first time, we have a proper handle on the type of defects, their scale and scope, and the breakdown within that context.

The report found what many of us present know to be the case, that fire defects are the most prevalent of the defects. It is estimated that between 40% and 70% of the properties are affected by fire defects. Water ingress affected between 20% and 50%, while structural defects, though still very important, affected somewhat fewer, estimated at between 5% and 25%. We now have a handle on the average cost, although I am aware that some residents are being presented with bills well in excess of that amount. The average cost, as far as we could estimate, is approximately €25,000 per unit, which means a potential cost to the Exchequer of between €1.5 billion and €2.5 billion.

I am acutely aware that many residents have already remediated their homes. Up to 12% of the properties have been fixed and made safe and over a third of other affected properties are either in the process of being fixed or work is being planned to undertake that remediation.

I am now moving on to implement many of the recommendations contained in the report of the working group. First, on 27 September, I brought a memorandum to inform Government of the content of the report and of the next steps that I plan to take.

Second, I established an interdepartmental and agency group to consider the recommendations contained in the working group's report and to elaborate on the options for the potential sources of financial support and the potential channels for deployment contained in the report. I received the final report of this group yesterday.

Third, an advisory group has been established to develop a code of practice, in the context of the Fire Services Acts, to provide guidance to building professionals and local authority building control services and local authority fire services.

In addition to the development of this code of practice, a separate code of practice has been developed as a result of a specific recommendation in the 2018 Fire Safety in Ireland report. This code of practice, which is due for publication shortly, will provide a framework for the ongoing management and maintenance of buildings with respect to fire safety and contains guidance specific to buildings containing flats and apartments. It will provide for clarity and consistency of approach nationally in making reasonable provisions for occupant safety. It is expected that this code of practice will be of assistance to building owners and operators in providing standard guidance and advice on the range of duties with respect to fire safety. It will complement and provide updated guidance to the existing suite of guidance documents published by my Department.

Fourth, my Department is engaging with the Housing Agency for the provision of advice on implementation of the recommendations of the working group's report.

In parallel to the steps I have outlined, I have met and corresponded with homeowner representative groups such as, as I have mentioned, the Construction Defects Alliance and Apartment Owners Network and, indeed, residents from specific estates, and I am committed to keeping them updated on progress. As I mentioned earlier, we had a well-attended webinar earlier this week with nearly 300 residents and residents' groups attending. That was a useful exchange of views but it also further broke down the scale of the complexities of different situations in which people find themselves. I thank all those who shared those stories with me. The feedback that we received from that meeting will form part of a further submission that we are working on.

I have heard that the excess levels on insurance policies held by residents of some apartment blocks are set so high that it nearly deems those apartments uninsured. I have had a positive initial engagement with Insurance Ireland in this regard and will continue this engagement as matters progress. I will also be engaging with the banks, and particularly mortgage lenders, as we move through the process.

It was an important engagement with Insurance Ireland to inform it as to where Government is going with this because we would like to see the sector taking a different view with regard to insurance as it can see that a Government scheme on remediation work will start. I also advised residents of that at the meeting on Monday.

I am also engaging with the Housing Agency in regard to the provision of advice on implementation of the recommendations of the report.

I intend bringing a further memorandum to the Government next week setting out proposals in more detail. I wish to assure residents of affected apartments and duplexes that the Government will help. We will help them to get their homes and lives back together, but we need a robust scheme. It will take a little time to bring forward the legislation required to underpin such a scheme. I advised Deputies of that last week also.

In the meantime, as we discussed in the House last week, there will be interim measures we can take, subject to Cabinet approval, and we should take them. I do not want people holding off on work they have planned already, particularly on the fire safety side, in waiting for a scheme to come through. In fairness, all Deputies across the House, and my Government colleagues, fully understand the need to have a scheme that is grounded in primary legislation. However, there are interim measures that we can take and I will be bringing forward proposals in that regard to Cabinet next week. The hundreds, if not thousands, of people right across the country whom I have met in respect of construction defects deserve that response and help from the Government and they will get it. I assure them of that.

As I mentioned, we need bespoke legislation. We cannot, although there have been other suggestions in that regard, use existing legislation. I do not believe that is the way forward. I appreciate the suggestion, having said that, but we can work together on bespoke legislation in this regard. I will be seeking the continued co-operation and support of Members opposite when we bring forward that legislation. The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage will have an important role in that. The members on the committee are experienced in this issue too. That will help the deliberation on and the structure of the scheme. We can ensure that it is robust and it moves forwards.

There are other elements within this. It is not only a question of how we structure the scheme. We also must be clear about how it will be rolled out and how we categorise the different defects within it, such as in the case of the different apartment blocks and estates that are affected. We will do so using the principle of remediating the worst first. We have to do that, with a particular focus on fire safety. We will then have to deal with the issue of certification. When works are carried out - we need them to be carried out by experienced and qualified professionals - it needs to be certified. That certification needs to be accepted, particularly within the insurance sector and the banking sector. We will need to ensure that when work is done, it is properly certified so that homes can be properly insured and, should a homeowner so wish, be sold with the value of that home reinstated.

As Minister, I am absolutely committed to bringing this scheme forward, getting Cabinet approval for it, moving on interim measures that can assist people now, and then moving forward with the legislation to put the scheme on a solid basis from which we can move on. I will continue to make good on the commitment we put into the programme for Government to tackle this issue once and for all, make people's homes safe and allow them to get back on with their lives. I campaigned for that in opposition and I am now in a position to do something about it as Minister.

I welcome the opportunity to debate this matter this afternoon. I look forward to updating colleagues in the Dáil again following Cabinet approval, should I receive same next week. I suggest that early in the new session we return to this where we can look at the recommendations and work it through. We will let the joint Oireachtas committee get involved then. I am anxious that we move on interim measures in advance of a scheme so that people can continue with, or go ahead and do, scheduled work but there will be a particular focus on fire safety. There are other important issues, such as water ingress and, obviously, structural defects. We must look at the fire safety piece for people's safety first by way of the interim measures.

As part of my memorandum next week, I will also be bringing for discussion to Government the issue of retrospection. Between 12% and 14% of properties have already been remediated and they are fixed.

We have to ensure they are properly certified and the work is done. We take it that this is the case. This issue came forward very strongly in the working group's report. I know of residents in my constituency who have fixed their own homes at great cost to them and their management companies through substantially increased levies. We also need to help them. We must focus on work on apartments and homes not remediated, particularly from a safety perspective. I look forward to the contributions from Deputies on the Opposition and the Government side. I confirm I will bring forward a memorandum to government next week at Cabinet.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I thank the Minister for his remarks. I extend my thanks and those of my party to the members of the working group, including the departmental officials in their advisory capacity. The report is significant. It will be seen as significant as the original report on pyrite and defective blocks in giving us a solid grounding for the scheme, which we all hope comes soon.

I acknowledge three organisations. The Apartment Owners Network represents homeowners campaigning on this and many other issues with regard to reform of the sector. The Construction Defects Alliance, especially since 2018 and especially in the run-up to the general election of 2020, has put a political focus on this issue and ensured it found its way into the programme for Government. The more recently established Not Our Fault 100% redress campaign emerged out of a number of specific developments and has dovetailed very well with the two other groups. All three are co-operating well and more will emerge in time.

I want to spend my time talking about the scheme rather than the report. This is not in any way to sideline its importance. Really we are now at the stage where we have to ensure we get the scheme right. From our party's point of view, we want to work with the Minister in a constructive and detailed way. While some of the remarks I will make are critical, it is because I want to ensure, as we go through the process the Minister has outlined, that we do it in a collaborative way in the best interests of all those we represent who are today living with significant structural defects.

The scheme has to follow the principles of the original pyrite remediation scheme. It has to provide 100% redress in the same way the original scheme did. This is only just and fair. It is the only right way for things to proceed. It has to be an end-to-end scheme. I appeal to the Minister not to repeat the mistakes of the grant-led scheme that exists and the revised scheme for defective blocks. I do not think that was ever the right approach, certainly with the benefit of hindsight. It would be a particularly inappropriate approach for multi-unit developments. Individual grants, either to homeowners, categories of homeowners or owners' management companies, would not be appropriate to address the issues involved. It has to be done through owners' management companies and there is no doubt about this. I have long supported the proposal of the Construction Defects Alliance for an agency to manage the scheme. Not only should this agency be responsible for the inspection, approval and contracting out of the works, it should also have the capacity to project manage in a way that voluntary directors of an owners' management company simply cannot or will not.

To avoid any confusion, and again I am open to amending my views on this, I have never argued that the 2014 legislation underpinning the Pyrite Resolution Board is sufficient for dealing with this. My point is we need a stand-alone agency. My only concern with establishing a new agency is that the recruitment of staff and other matters will take time. I have always been of the view that new underpinning legislation for a new scheme is required. The Minister has a choice to make and I urge him to explore it. If the Minister accepts the need for a stand-alone agency, should a new one be created or should the remit of the existing agency be expanded? This could be done with new underpinning legislation to shift the remit beyond pyrite resolution and into wider defects resolution. Ultimately, I do not mind what the mechanism is so long as it is established quickly and does the job that is required.

With respect to the legislation, we want to work with the Minister but I will be critical on this point. There was enormous frustration in the committee at the lack of even a small amount of time to do adequate legislative scrutiny and deal not with amendments drafted by us but amendments initiated by homeowners on the enhanced defective block scheme. It was not an ideal process. Notwithstanding the difficulty the Minister put us in with the Bill, the accelerated pre-legislative scrutiny, as I like to call it - other members of the committee call it something else - had a real value. The three sessions we had were enormously important.

Nobody wants to delay the legislation, especially not those of us on this side of the House who, like the Minister, have been campaigning on this for a very long time. There is a difference between delaying and giving legislation adequate time. I appeal to the Minister not to make the mistakes that were made with the defective blocks Bill. Homeowners are not happy with the Bill and the Minister knows this, whatever about what people say on the floor of the Dáil. When the scheme eventually opens, many of the concerns and issues homeowners asked us to raise in the House will become apparent. Therefore, if we are to take the Minister at his word, we will get adequate time to scrutinise legislation. We will also get adequate time to table amendments if homeowners, in particular their representative groups, ask us to do so, as they did with regard to the defective blocks, to ensure we have cross-party support. It would be absolutely brilliant if this work had the unanimous support of Members of the Oireachtas. It would give homeowners incredible confidence in the scheme in a way that is currently not the case with regard to defective blocks.

There is a genuine problem with the funding. Even if we get a scheme up and running next year, there is no financial provision. There was a small uplift in the combined funding for defective blocks and pyrite. It is difficult to see this funding extending either to the emergency measures the Minister spoke about, which I welcome, or to applicants and drawdown for a remediation scheme. Therefore, there will need to be additional provision next year not just for this but also for defective blocks if it is to be done properly.

I have set out my views in a letter to the Minister. Again, these are our views at the start of the discussion and I am open to better ways of doing it. We need to be very clear about who gets full remediation and where can the State recoup some of the costs. My strong view is homeowners for whom the property is their principal private residence, social housing landlords, whether local authorities or approved housing bodies, and single property landlords with one property should all be included in the scheme for 100% redress through the owners' management companies. There is a big challenge in the scheme with multi-unit landlords, especially institutional landlords in places such as Beacon South Quarter. To allow the scheme to happen quickly, upfront 100% funding should be provided through the agency. Multiple unit landlords should have to pay for remediation. This should be recouped through the agency and the Department. If not, a charge should be placed on the property. This would allow ease in getting the works done and ensure landlords, particularly institutional landlords who can pay, and in some cases already have paid, for remediation, do so.

At a later stage there will be a need to return to the wider issue of the industry's contribution to this. All I would ask is for the Minister to look at the attempt of his predecessor Phil Hogan to establish a levy. He should publish some of the information from that time and share it with the Oireachtas committee. Let us have a conversation about what is the best way to ensure that industry, especially profitable sectors of the industry in areas that played a role in this, can contribute to the ultimate cost. As we all know, this will be multi-annual, it will be multibillion and the taxpayer should not have to foot the full bill.

I welcome what the Minister said about a risk-based approach, retrospection, interim measures and emergency funding, although the proof will be in the pudding. I would like the Minister to put more focus on the role of the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA, and what the State can do with respect of NAMA's often very negative role in cases where there are defects. The Minister has met the insurance industry but more needs to be done on its role as we move forward. The timeline is crucial and I have made this point to the Minister previously. More than one year ago he announced the enhanced defective blocks scheme.

I accept these things cannot happen overnight, but we still do not know when the enhanced scheme will open and whether it will it be early or mid-next year. We do not know how long it will take to process applications and, ultimately, we do not know when families in Donegal, Mayo, Clare and Limerick will be able to draw down that much-needed funding. That is an exceptionally long time. I suspect the first drawdown under the new scheme is likely to be in the latter end of next year. I hope I am wrong, and I will stand corrected if I am, but that would be two years from the announcement of the scheme before people can access it. That is too long for families affected by defective blocks as much as it is too long for families in this other situation.

We would like to hear the new year updates on the wider reform of building control and consumer protection, which is in the programme for Government. I do not have time to go into it today, but the one thing I would say is that it was very disappointing to read a story last weekend in the Business Post about a change in the national building control and market surveillance office's report, from the initial to final draft, on defective blocks in Donegal. The lines that were removed are very important. We should all accept that building control is the poor cousin of our planning regime. It is under-resourced, undertrained and understaffed, which is no criticism of the officials there. We have to get that right and improve. Let us be honest and accept the criticism and collectively work together to improve the situation and ensure the kind of scandal, which we will have to spend billions of euro to fix, never happens again.

Deputy Chris Andrews

Clearly, the Minister has worked particularly hard on this and it is important to acknowledge that. It is great there appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel for homeowners for whom this has been an utter nightmare. The devil is in the detail and we will see that detail in time.

When it comes to home defects, it is hard to know where to start. Throughout the country, there is no community without a story about defective apartments. So many people scraped together and saved money to buy their dream home. A few years after residents moved into these homes, cracks and leaks started to appear and these cracks and leaks turned the dream into a nightmare. These defects were not created by the homeowners. Homeowners bought their homes in good faith. They bought them because they believed they would be built well because the banks approved their mortgages and the councils that gave many of them mortgages would not have done so if the buildings were defective, one would have thought. The surveyors said they were grand. The glossy brochures said they were dream homes. What could have gone wrong? What went wrong was the Government's light-touch regulation. Developers could put up whatever they wanted because there would be no one out to check on the defects. I spoke to a council official last week who said the lack of regulation gave the green light for junk to be built.

All the cracks and defects have appeared and homeowners cannot afford the money required to fix their homes. No one would want to buy the defective homes. In my constituency, there were issues of fire safety in Longboat Quay South and water ingress in Gallery Quay and Poolbeg Quay. The owners of apartments in Poolbeg Quay need to be supported financially to resolve the issues. They should not have to pick up the tab because of the Government's failure. Some owners will be out of pocket to the sum of €20,000 to €25,000. Ordinary families cannot afford this.

It is also important not to forget that defective apartments are not all privately owned. Much public housing is also defective. York Street apartments, which are 500 meters from here, would be classed as defective. These apartments are just 15 years old and they received plenty of architectural awards, but awards mean nothing when a person is living in a defective building. Last year, a water tank burst in one of the blocks in York Street apartments and the residents had to move to neighbouring accommodation where they remained for two months. Dublin City Council has spent millions fixing the defects and millions more will have to be spent to remedy these defects.

I am regularly contacted by residents living in flats that have chronic mould and dampness. Flats in Whitefriar Street have serious issues. I was contacted by a family living in a flat in St. Andrew's Court on the other side of Merrion Square. The mould and damp in many of these flats is shocking. These flats are defective and unhealthy to live in and need to be pulled down and rebuilt. Young families should not live in these conditions. One child living in overcrowded conditions has what is like a smoker's cough due to the extent of the mould, condensation and dampness.

Defective apartments are not all privately owned. The flats in Mercer House, Pearse House and Countess Markiewicz House are beautifully designed but they are not fit for purpose anymore. Their day has come and gone and they need to be refurbished and regenerated. This is what needs to be done for residents in the inner city who have so often been forgotten and neglected by the Government and Dublin City Council.

Deputy Ivana Bacik

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important topic on behalf of the Labour Party and to respond to the Minister's proposals on how he and the Government propose to address the issue of defects in apartments. This is a serious issue for many homeowners, families and households. Like other colleagues, I have met many residents of affected apartment blocks, as well as with the Construction Defects Alliance and others. In July, I raised this issue in the Dáil with the Tánaiste and sought a commitment from Government for an adequate and effective redress scheme for those affected, and I was glad there was a positive response to that at the time.

The Minister set out the steps he is taking and those he proposes to take. He said he received the final report of the interdepartmental and agency group yesterday, which looks at the recommendations in the working group report. He also said he would bring a memo to Cabinet next week on that. It is somewhat unfortunate we are debating this in a vacuum because we have not yet seen either the interdepartmental group report or the memo being brought to the Cabinet, nor will we have an opportunity to debate the report until the new year. Will the Minister of State bring back the call we would all make, cross-party, to have an early debate on this issue again in the new year, when we will have sight of the interdepartmental group findings and the memo to the Cabinet? We would then be clearer as to exactly what the Government proposes to do for those who are seriously affected.

This cuts across many different constituencies and affects throughout the county. In my constituency of Dublin Bay South, I have met apartment owners and residents from Rathmines, Ballsbridge and across the constituency who are affected by defective construction in their buildings and homes. Many are already out of pocket because they have expended money on remediation works, either personally or through fees to their owner management companies, and we should not forget that many more who have not spent that money yet are living in danger. A home should be a safe place. Housing is a human right. Last week I stood alongside many colleagues outside these Houses with people whose homes are not safe because of defective building. It is five years since the Grenfell Tower fire tragedy in London, which showed us so starkly the carnage that can result because of defective building practices. I note an Irish company was involved with the supply of cladding that was involved in that tragedy. Tragedies such as these are always at the back of our minds when debating construction defects and defective buildings because they can have such real and tragic consequences. All those living in defective homes are deeply aware of this, as they are of the huge expense and distress remediation works have caused. A woman in my constituency said her daughter risked not being able to go to college because the family were so out of pocket. After receiving such an enormous bill for remedying defects in their apartments, they could not afford education costs for their children. That is the sort of impact this is having on families.

We know from the working group report that up to 80% of apartments built between 1991 and 2013 may be defective. Of the 100,000 units, which is a massive figure, up to 90,000 are affected by the most serious issues, the fire safety defects, that arose primarily through shoddy work for which all sectors of the industry - professionals, contractors and subcontractors - were responsible. Limited regulatory oversight by State bodies was also a key contributory factor. We know from the working group that the estimated cost for remediation is approximately €2.5 billion and the report was clear the State should provide redress to owners to address defects through management companies, if necessary, and that retrospective financial support should be provided to owners who have or are paying towards remediation.

I am conscious we had a cross-party briefing on the owner management companies issue last week. We know owner management companies are the most effective mechanism to deliver the whole building's safety that is essential in ensuring those living in multi-unit developments can live safely and be assured of appropriate remediation work. However, owner management companies, as we all know, are largely run by volunteer directors who may often lack the necessary expertise and experience to discharge the critical responsibilities they are doing voluntarily. The funding challenges being faced by many such companies encapsulate the real difficulties here.

In practical terms, owner management companies cannot borrow. They will face lengthy processes to recover debt. They can only operate with the cash they have to hand and, therefore, the Government will need to provide proactive, hands-on support to such companies to ensure they can manage remediation works effectively to deliver safe buildings and outcomes. Any approach that only partially funds owner management companies for remediation works will risk leaving buildings unsafe and families in those buildings therefore unsafe.

We need a public sector body underpinned by primary legislation. I know the Minister has acknowledged the need for legislation. We need a body to take charge of managing the remediation programme, as the Pyrite Resolution Board has done, in conjunction with owner management companies. The works should be fully funded upfront by the State and cost recovery should operate through the tax system. In addition, we will all be conscious that people who have already paid or are paying towards remediation costs will have to be included in the scheme because to do otherwise would lead to many owner management companies being unable to complete remediation works already under way. We need to ensure inclusion for owner occupiers and social landlords too, because housing associations form part of the occupiers and landlords for many multi-unit dwellings. We will be conscious of that as well. Support can be provided by means of grants based on the production of confirmation of payment of remediation costs by the relevant owner management company.

I will highlight the need for the construction industry to contribute substantially to the cost of the remediation support scheme. That has been acknowledged. We in the Labour Party have called for a 2% levy on construction profits of construction companies from 2024 onwards for a period of at least ten years. It is necessary for those directly involved in creating the risk to also have a direct responsibility to bear a substantial portion of the costs. That is a crucial issue, not only to deal with past defects, but also to ensure one prevents and deters companies and construction operators from building defectively into the future.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

Very shortly after I was elected to the Dáil, I was introduced to Pat Montague, the Construction Defects Alliance and the Apartment Owners Network. I would like to believe I have continued the good working relationship the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, had with these organisations before me. Following on from the Minister's endeavours, I set about assisting them through a hearing before the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, which provided clarity and a platform to voice their concerns and desires for redress and, in particular, the setting up of a working group which clearly had cross-party support.

Shortly after this briefing, a working group was set up by the Minister to examine a defects and redress process. The figure is still unclear but an estimated 100,000 homes in this State are affected by defects which currently put people at risk of living in unsafe and uninhabitable homes, ranging from fire to structural and water-ingress defects. Since the report by the working groups examining defects was published this summer, we have eagerly and patiently waited for the Minister and the interagency working group to publish the proposals.

This week, the Minister outlined the Department's proposals and it is both reassuring and welcoming that the Minister has listened to the concerns of homeowners through his engagement with the stakeholders and Department officials which I understand will include long-term solutions but also a set of interim measures. To my knowledge, the Minister and his Department are working under a worst-first strategy, which will ensure safety and fire issues are dealt with promptly. I welcome the establishment of a fire remediation section within the Housing Agency in order that those who apply to the scheme will have assistance from experts who can guide them through the process.

I noted earlier that the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, had worked extensively with parties affected by defects in the Thirty-second Dáil. She began preparing a Defective Dwellings Bill with the professional expertise of barristers Deirdre Ní Fhloinn and Mr. Conor Linehan who did a considerable amount of research and spent a considerable amount of time putting the Bill together. We are one of the only countries in the world not to have legislated in this manner to protect homeowners. Now is the time for such legislation to allow people to protect their homes from defective construction practices.

The purpose of the Bill is to:

make provision for the law relating to the liability of builders, developers and others involved in the carrying out of residential construction works; to specify certain requirements applicable to residential construction works; to provide for certain duties to apply to such works; to provide for a means of redress for persons affected by housing defects and to specify the limitation periods relating to claims for such redress and to provide for related matters.

I introduced the Defective Dwellings Bill in the Dáil last September and we would be very grateful if the Minister would bring the Bill to Second Stage, as a Government action, considering its merits in providing a clear pathway for homeowners to find redress when confronted with a defect in their home.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

It is important we address this issue and continue to do so until we have full sight, not only of the interim measures the Minister spoke about earlier on, but the full outworkings of the working group's report in order to have a scheme of 100% redress through a remedial programme to address the defects, whether it is 100,000 homes or more. As other Deputies said, this is not just private homes that are in landlords' possession. There are also private homes which are ordinary citizens' properties and homes which now belong to Dublin City Council and other approved housing bodies.

We have seen reports in the newspapers in the past couple of days on the Herberton complex in Rialto, part of the former Fatima Mansions scheme, which was bought by Dublin City Council from Kennedy Wilson in lieu of the Part V provisions that are supposed to be on all building sites. Kennedy Wilson wished Clancy Quay to be exclusive. We opposed it at the time. It had the facility to offer a severely defective block of apartments to Dublin City Council. There are major questions as to why Dublin City Council bought those properties knowing, as I believe, that there were defects. The council fitted them out, told people they would be ready in January of this year and, lo and behold, it was not and still is not because the defects are on such a grand scale.

It is not just the likes of Herberton. The Crescent Building in Park West is another case and there is the Metropolitan, Tramyard and many other complexes in the Dublin 8, 10 and 12 areas I represent in which we know there are defects. The scale of them is such that sometimes the first residents hear of defects is when a fire officer issues a potentially-dangerous-building notice. Think of the panic that puts in people's minds when they have to take immediate action not to use the car parks or the bins or, in some cases, even more restrictive impositions to protect themselves and other residents in the buildings. These buildings are a fire trap and that is why insurance is not available.

That is why we need to act as quickly as possible to give the commitment, as seems to be the move, that the State will help those and ensure full help is there in order that those who are ready can go ahead and draw down money, if the banks are willing to lend it, to start remedial works in order that they can stay in their properties, rather than have to move, or to address the issues as quickly as possible to give them relief so they can sleep at night.

This is not the fault of any of those who live in these complexes. They did not build them. They bought or moved into these properties with the best will in the world. Suddenly, their dreams are being shattered when they are faced with bills of €60,000 or €70,000 to make good something they were not aware of in the first place which involved shoddy workmanship and incompetence by the State and the local authorities, which did not do a job they should have done. That is the biggest scandal.

Caithfimid déileáil leis seo chomh tapa agus is féidir chun faoiseamh a thabhairt don ghnáthphobal a bhfuil cónaí air sna tithe agus na hárasáin seo. Níl an locht air gur cheannaigh sé tithe a raibh na fadhbanna seo ann. Ghlac sé leis an rud a bhí curtha os a chomhair. Ghlac sé leis go raibh an Rialtas agus an chomhairle cathrach tar éis an ruda chirt a dhéanamh agus go raibh na hárasáin seo foirfe. Is léir nach bhfuil siad foirfe ach níl an t-airgead atá á lorg ag an ngnáthphobal. Tá an Stát ag bogadh sa treo ceart ach caithfidh sé a dhéanamh cinnte de go dtuigeann na comhlachtaí árachais agus na bainc go bhfuil siad chun cuidiú a thabhairt. Ba chóir dóibhsean tacú leis na gnáth-thionóntaí seo.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

I thank all those on the working group, who did much work on this, especially the people involved in the Apartment Owners' Work, the Construction Defects Alliance, and the more recently formed Not Our Fault redress campaign.

The best way to prevent defects from happening again starts with a robust planning and building control system. Yesterday, the Dáil passed legislation to remove the planning process from some social housing which will be built next year. If we had a great, robust building control system in this country which has rarely ever failed us, one might make some excuse for that, but given that we have an appalling track record, ripping up some of the safeguards in the process is the wrong approach. Unfortunately, while that legislation is for a one-year temporary suspension of planning for social homes, I predict that at this time next year, we will be asked to extend the legislation again. Safeguards relating to fire safety defects are one area where people could start to raise concerns if they felt that high-risk construction methods were being used. They were able to flag issues in the planning process. That has now been removed with respect to social homes.

The Minister made comments about interim measures and bringing the memo to Cabinet next week. We do not want residents to hold back from having fire safety remediation works take place. We know that is happening in a small number of cases. The Minister signalled that he would prioritise fire safety works. I can absolutely see the logic in prioritising the highest risk first. There is a potential problem with that since residents often have fire safety and water ingress defects. If the memo says the Government will give some guarantee of retrospective funding if residents do fire safety works in the near future, but cannot give a guarantee for other works, does that mean some residents will hold back because they will carry out the works at the same time?

The Construction Defects Alliance gave a briefing to Oireachtas Members recently. Kevin Hollingsworth showed us photos of where people working on developments had deliberately broken through concrete separations between floors in a bid to save about €30 worth of building materials and those works had put the lives of everyone in that block at danger. Some very deliberate work was done. Another key point it made is that owners' management companies are already struggling to get management fees paid. They are run by volunteer directors. They cannot borrow, in practical terms. Landlords are already the worst payers with regard to non-payment of fees. There are already issues where they cannot continue with works because some landlords will not contribute to the cost. It is essential that there is up-front funding and that multi-unit landlords have a way to recoup that, either with a charge with interest in the units, through taxation or otherwise.

A receiver acting on behalf of an arm of the State, NAMA, has been pursuing residents and homeowners in Carrickmines Green to force them to take on responsibility for construction defects. It is scandalous that the State, which has failed abysmally to enforce building standards through one of its agencies, is pursuing residents and homeowners to shoulder the costs. That is absolutely wrong. If this Government is committed to fairness in this area, it would put a stop to that straight away.

Regarding the National Building Control and Market Surveillance Office, there are reports today that local authorities are buying construction materials which do not comply with EU rules and standards for building materials. That shows what needs to be done about accountability. The draft report on quarries in Donegal was given to the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, last June. It criticised the lack of oversight of the quarry industry and the lack of resources available to regulators in the sector. It stated, "quarries in Ireland have been poorly regulated regarding planning, environmental and market surveillance compliance perspective due [to] no overall responsibility for quarries within the local authority set-up." I do not know this from reading the report because this was all taken out of the report after it was sent to the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, last June. I know this from reading media reports since.

Why were critical parts of the report taken out? How can we learn from past mistakes if these criticisms are deleted from official reports? Did the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, or his Department play any role in seeking the removal of these criticisms from the report after he received it last June? It was published only last week. Why do the Government or Minister seem to think the public does not have a right to know about this? How can we possibly learn if that is how it will happen?

Another part of the report stated that quarries and pits in every townland in Ireland could open and close in a matter of hours. That is a key issue for regulation. It also stated that, critically, it is only when disaster strikes that such services are properly resourced, until they gradually become under-resourced. It is referring to market surveillance. It states that millions are spent on planning and billions on remediation and fixing non-compliance when, in comparison, very little is spent on building control, inspection and market surveillance. That is of critical importance and was removed from the draft report so that none of us would find out about it.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I acknowledge the work done on this to date and highlight the issues in my own constituency, as other Deputies may have already. Many people have been in touch on an ongoing basis over the past year. We have raised concerns in different ways. Since April, we have spoken with homeowners in St. Gabriel's, Granitefield Manor, Cabinteely, Dún Laoghaire and Blackrock, who are all affected. At a recent residents' association meeting, people in one area were advised that a ballpark figure for the cost of an apartment could be in the region of €25,000 for the remediation of defects. I have spoken with one family who have outgrown their apartment but they cannot sell it given the current defects. It will impact on their lives in an ongoing way until this is redressed and they have a clear plan. It is very difficult. I spoke with one lady who, at considerable cost to herself, addressed the defects in her apartment. It is not exactly money she had lying around. She found the money and was able to invest. She had saved and saved to be able to do the work and found other ways to finance it. She is concerned about whether a retrospective measure may be included in any scheme to be of assistance to her with the work she has already done, and how the equity of that might be spread out between her and her neighbours.

I am aware of, and have to be sensitive and careful about, a matter which is in front of the courts, which relates to the ongoing issues with Carrickmines Green.

It is currently in front of the courts so I must be very sensitive about mentioning anything in the House. I simply wish to acknowledge that while these things are pending, whether in the courts or any other place, the stress for individuals and families is considerable. I spoke with one lady in that project who is concerned about the morality of allowing anybody to continue to live there as a tenant until she knows what the situation is. I speak to that ongoing stress and uncertainty, which is personal, moral and financial in nature. This is why the development of a scheme, and clarity for people in every possible way, is so important and urgent. It is a matter of equity that it be addressed as soon as possible.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

As this is an important debate with implications for thousands of families across the State, I fail to understand why there is not even a Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage present to hear what we have to say. I ask the present Minister of State, who is at the Department of Justice, to ensure Ministers read back the transcript of what we are about to say. In particular, my constituency colleague, the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, should do so. It is important he hears what I have to say.

On the background to the defective blocks in Donegal and the west of Ireland, as many as 13 or 14 counties are affected. I can speak with great authority about my home county of Donegal. I live in Buncrana on the Inishowen Peninsula. It is the epicentre of an absolute disaster caused by the utter failure in regulation of the construction sector. People have been left utterly traumatised and devastated by all this. After many years of campaigning and trying to get to the truth of what happened, the Government of the day came up with a 90:10 scheme. People wanted to give this a chance; it was better than nothing. That scheme has become utterly discredited. On the back of that, the people of Donegal and Mayo rose up. That culminated a year ago in 20,000 people marching in this city to demand justice and a scheme that would allow them to rebuild their lives. The Government said that would happen. The months dragged on but then in July of this year, it finally came up with the updated scheme. The homeowners were engaging in good faith and it looked like the issues they were asking be addressed would be. The proposals were entirely reasonable and many would cost nothing to the State, but they were left out of the scheme.

We then forced some degree of pre-legislative scrutiny at the housing committee. Limited as it was, at least it was something. It was a day of scrutiny. Then there were all the amendments. There were 80 amendments for the homeowners but all put forward by the Opposition were turned down. The Minister, Deputy McConalogue, challenged my party on what legislation we had brought in and what amendments. Did he not pay any attention? He was not present, did not pay any attention to the pre-legislative scrutiny and did not listen to the concerns of the homeowners. When it came to actual legislation coming through here he did not seem to contribute a whole pile. He made a bit of a speech. Did he not witness the Opposition collectively putting forward 80 separate amendments on behalf of the homeowners? Those are the amendments he was looking for. He asks now about Sinn Féin publishing amending legislation. For his information, we will be working with homeowners. Maybe he does not understand the legislative process but when legislation is passed, it takes six months for amendments to that legislation to be accepted by these Houses. Those six months will have passed in mid-January. After mid-January, we will introduce legislation to amend the Government legislation, which still has not been enacted by the way. We will introduce that in co-operation with the families and we will go back at those issues again because we believe this updated scheme is entirely flawed when it comes to bringing justice and 100% redress to our people. The Minister, Deputy McConalogue, has challenged us on that issue. I am sorry he did not pay attention back in July to the debate that took place. He did not listen to the homeowners or follow their amendments. We are going to bring them back in again in mid-January, if he is so concerned. I hope he can support this and finally get behind the people of Donegal and do what is right by them when the opportunity comes again.

I wanted to put all that on record because I want all the homeowners affected by defective apartments who were in the Gallery recently to learn from what happened to us in Donegal and those in Mayo. They should know when you are engaging in good faith in a process you could be betrayed in a moment's time. They should learn from our experience to ensure that all the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed. People are entitled to 100% redress. No matter where you live in this State, if you are a victim of pyrite, defective blocks or of the cowboys who built houses during the Celtic tiger for pure greed, you are entitled to justice and to 100% redress. Do not accept assurances. Check everything and get it right. I tell the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Deputy James Browne, that we will be back come January and we will try again to make the Government do what is right by the victims of this utter travesty and scandal.

Deputy Paul Murphy

It is very unfortunate we are here on the final normal day of the Dáil debating this issue without the proposal that is going to be brought to Cabinet just next week. Every time we have asked about this over the past number of months, we have been told the Minister is going to bring a proposal to Cabinet before Christmas. It is going to happen at literally the final meeting of the Cabinet before Christmas. I really hope it is just a coincidence that it just so happens to be a time when there is no Dáil sitting to discuss what is being brought forward and the media will have their attention elsewhere and will not be significantly reflecting discussion on this. I hope I am wrong about that. I hope it is purely a coincidence but it is suspicious to say the least.

It is also very striking that in the Minister of State's remarks there is no history to this at all. It is like as a society we just slipped and fell into a situation where 100,000 families have apartments or duplexes with latent defects that make them unsafe in many circumstances and leave them with an average bill of €25,000. Most of those people do not know they are affected yet. There is no explanation of how we got here. Why is that? I assume it is because the regime of self-certification was introduced into the Dáil when Fine Gael was in government and then passed as legislation when Fianna Fáil was in government. Those parties were warned about such an approach at the time, and very clearly. Eamon Gilmore, then of the Workers' Party, said:

The principle being enshrined in this section is very dangerous. It will expose people who are buying homes to buying products which are sub-standard against which they will have no comeback.

Despite that warning Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil went ahead with the legislation and opened the door to developers and builders cutting corners, putting people's lives at risk and costing them very significant amounts of money. It is absolutely scandalous.

That brings me to the next point, which is that the Minister says, and has said repeatedly, that the Government will help. From my experience of the people affected by this issue, that language drives them absolutely wild, because it implies this is their fault but the Government is going to very generously step in and give them a dig out and some sort of assistance with the problem. This is not their fault. If the Minister had been outside the Dáil last night he would have seen many people outside chanting "Not our fault. Not our fault". They feel it extremely strongly because it is the fault of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil for introducing this legislation and it is the fault of the cowboy developers and builders who used this legislation and abused it in order to cut corners. It was not just a small number of them either, as perhaps 80% of buildings from between 1991 and 2013 are affected. What the people affected by this want is not help but very clear 100% redress, full retrospection, for it to be done rapidly and for the State to pursue the builders responsible. It is very simple. I do not understand why we are so long on now from the original report from the working group and why we cannot have the proposals before us. I am not saying the implementation of it can be done overnight, as of course it cannot, but the principles should be announced immediately. If the scheme does not meet those things it will not be accepted. I say that very clearly.

I asked the Minister for Finance about this on Leaders' Questions a couple of weeks ago and he said we would not be satisfied no matter what. If it is those things, I will be satisfied, and the homeowners will be satisfied. If it is not, they will not be satisfied at all and the campaign will be kicking up a gear. To reflect on the points Deputy Mac Lochlainn made, these people are very aware that those affected by mica got a scheme that said "100% redress" in the headline but then there was a bit of small text that meant it was not 100% redress. They will be on the lookout for that and they will not be fooled.

Finally, I pay tribute to those who have spoken out, who are living in conditions where they sometimes cannot sleep because of the fear of what could happen to their homes. They have put their energy into campaigning, to protesting and speaking about their own personal experiences, and to putting massive pressure on the Government. They are a formidable group of people. If the Government gives them anything less than 100% redress, it will be making a very big mistake.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Up to 100,000 families and individuals are living in dangerously defective homes that are fire hazards, have water ingress, chronic damp, structural defects and cracks everywhere, all because of the disgusting greed of property developers who were facilitated every step of the way by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in the feeding frenzy that was the Celtic tiger. These people have been left with the bitter consequences. Of course, the mica and pyrite families and households had to fight every step of the way and are still not being given the support and full redress they deserve.

One very specific example is the Carrickmines Green apartments. There are 235 apartments in that complex. NAMA took it over and the receiver acting on behalf of NAMA was informed by the residents of the fire defects. They pleaded with the receiver to remediate them. Eventually, under pressure, it remediated them but when the residents did another audit, they found there were still fire defects. The remediation has not been done and now NAMA and the receiver want to sell some of those apartments to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council for social housing, with the defects still there. Even though NAMA has remediated other developments, it will not do it for these. It is trying to force the residents in Carrickmines Green to carry the can. It is absolutely outrageous. I have brought this up with the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, as have others. What is being done to these people, when a State agency, NAMA, is involved, is an absolute outrage. As well as the more general demand for 100% redress, I am asking the Government to engage with those residents and to tell NAMA to remediate these homes, given that it is responsible for that estate.

Deputy Louise O'Reilly

I pay tribute to the men and women in the Construction Defects Alliance, the mica campaigners, the pyrite campaigners, and all the people who have had the courage to come forward and speak out. It is really tough for them. There are 100,000 homes impacted by this, including a number of estates in my area. I am not going to name them, not because their names are not in the public domain - they kind of already are - but because there are people there trying to sell their homes. I spoke to a young couple recently. They bought a starter home at the height of the Celtic tiger, just before we were about to feel the full lash of what Fianna Fáil had done to this State. They bought a small apartment. It is now not big enough for them and their family and they cannot sell it. They are stuck there, in overcrowded accommodation that is also unsafe. Not alone is it not a good place to live because of the size of it, it is not a good place to live because of the defects.

The report of the working group examining the defects on housing made tough reading for anyone but if you were sitting in one of those apartments, I can only imagine how angry and frustrated you would be. These people are paying their mortgages every month, knowing their apartments are defective through no fault of their own, having done the thing we are led to believe we should do, which is to grow up, get a job, get a mortgage and get somewhere to live. They did that. They followed, as they would say, all the rules. I would agree with Deputy Paul Murphy on this. The response from the Government seems to be saying that it will give them a hand with that or will help them out. It is a language thing and maybe it is unintentional - I hope it is - but it implies that somehow it is their fault and it is not. They bought homes in good faith.

A couple of weeks ago we brought forward a motion for 100% redress. We should not have to say that 100% redress should mean 100% because it should not mean any less than 100%. The families in Donegal, Mayo and everywhere else impacted by mica and pyrite know that when the Government says 100% it has a different figure in its mind. It says 100% but in truth they know it is not going to mean 100% to them. Fair play to the people who stand outside the Dáil because they were brave enough to come and do that. When they say they want 100%, they need the Government to understand that that is actually 100%. They should not be punished for the light-touch regulation that was a big feature of previous Fianna Fáil Governments but was also, let us be honest, enthusiastically supported by its best friends in Fine Gael.

Today we are discussing the report of the working group examining defects in houses. In 2018 we had the Safe as Houses report. What happened to that report? It is a bit of a Father Ted moment - "Is there anything to be said for another report?" We are going to arrive, and I believe we have already, at a stage where we can say this issue has been reported on ad nauseam. What is actually needed is action. The recommendations from the Safe as Houses report have not been implemented as yet. Where are the measures to reform the building control system to give homeowners and tenants greater protections and ensure we do not have a repeat of the Celtic tiger era building defects scandal? For years we in Sinn Féin have been campaigning for a redress scheme for homeowners and tenants impacted by Celtic tiger era defects. Our party spokesperson Deputy Ó Broin has a long track record on this issue. We need serious action for these people very early in the new year. I remind the Minister of State that 100% has to mean 100% because these people were 100% let down. They now need to be 100% compensated through that redress.

Deputy Seán Canney

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this sometimes emotive subject. Hundreds of thousands of families have been put into a situation where they bought a house or an apartment in good faith, took out a mortgage on it and are still paying that mortgage for a home that is now defective. There is widespread anger about what has happened to innocent people who were trying to pay their way in life to ensure they had a home for their family. They were not relying on the State to provide it for them. They were not asking the State for anything other than good governance and a proper regime to ensure that any construction done in this country could stand up and be looked at with pride.

As someone who worked in the construction industry for a long number of years, it gives me no great pride to have to come in here and talk about defects in buildings and houses. This has come about because decisions were made in times past to dispense with very good practices, which we had. I will give an example. When I was building local authority housing, the National Building Agency oversaw the construction. The clerk would randomly visit sites with his box and would take samples of electric cables, timber, door locks or copper pipes. He would take a sample of each component that goes into making a house, bring them away and get them tested.

The place they were tested at the time was the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards, which did all the testing. If any faults showed up, that particular component of the house would have to be stripped out and the same would happen in every other house under construction. We also had a regime for testing concrete blocks and cubes of concrete. They were tested in the university in Galway at the time. There was a seven-day test which would give an indication and there was a 28-day test which could be stood over. That seems to have been lost in transition. We may have got too self-confident that we were well able to do things without any controls. All of those good practices were dismissed as trivial and unnecessary in the construction industry. We moved towards self-regulation and self-certification. When we turned that corner, we found that we were moving into fog. Self-certification and the regulations attached were there but who was enforcing them? Who was refereeing the match? Who was blowing the whistle when something went wrong? That is how we found ourselves in the position we are in now whereby a taxpayers' bill of €5 billion to carry out rectifications is probable. Joe Public is still going to pay for this, no matter how we look at this issue. Introducing a levy on the manufacture of concrete does little other than create an increase in the cost of material for which Joe and Mary Public will pay. We are not learning at all in what we are doing here. We are talking about bringing in more regulations. We are talking about more certification that can be done by architects and engineers. We are talking about improving regulations. We are over-regulated but any enforcement is totally absent. Our local authorities, the building control agents for the State, are totally underfunded to do that particular job. They do not have the numbers or funding to do it, nor have they the wherewithal because it is just an add-on within a planning department. It is not dealt with in a serious way.

A building control officer might call out to a site at random and look at something. He or she would say to the certifier for the client that there is something wrong and work should stop. How many such visits are paid per annum to how many sites in the country? I asked the Department how many building control officers we have in this country and was told that is a matter for local authorities. We are not learning anything from all of this.

In my time, there were three aspects to building control. There was sampling and testing of materials. There was sampling and testing of products to ensure they had CE certification and stood up to the standards required. Visual inspections were also carried out to ensure that where the materials were acceptable, they were being installed properly so that we had what we are entitled to have, that is, proper buildings that are fit for purpose and with no risk of defects.

During the Celtic tiger era, we also got a crazy idea that every house in the country needed to have a structural guarantee. The people paying for that were the couples and individuals who were building the houses. Those were the people who wanted to do something for themselves and not be a burden on the State. The banks and the Central Bank demanded it. Local authorities are still demanding it for local authority mortgages. A bond at the moment would cost €600, €700 or €800. What is it worth? What is it worth to any of these people who have taken out and paid for a structural guarantee, an insurance bond, and are getting nothing in return? Where are the companies that underwrite this risk? They have disappeared away from the scene but still have the gall to offer structural guarantees on houses now. Even worse, our banks and local authorities will not give out mortgages without structural guarantees in place. It is futile. Those guarantees are a waste of money because they are not worth the paper they are written on. That is a fact. Until we wake up and realise that unless we put proper enforcement in place, we are still going to put ourselves and the taxpayers at risk of being required to fund another defects crisis down the line. Writing out regulations, memos, instructions and directives for local authorities is not worth the paper they are written on if we do not stand up, man up and say we will never let this happen again. The way to ensure it does not happen again is by investing in building control and not in remediation. I concur with everyone who has said that for the people who have been visited by these enormous problems, we, as a State, must ensure that everything is done to provide 100% redress because we owe justice to them, their families and ourselves.

An Ceann Comhairle

Words of wisdom from Deputy Canney. I thank him for the benefit of his practical experience.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice (Deputy James Browne)

On behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, I thank all Deputies who have contributed to this debate. We can all agree that many homeowners and residents of apartments and duplexes have found themselves in a difficult and stressful position when defects have arisen in respect of their buildings through no fault of their own. As the Minister said on a number of occasions, this is a nettle that this Government is determined to grasp and we are committed to providing support to affected homeowners. Given the personal impact of these problems on the homeowners involved, the Minister would like to reach a broad political consensus on these vital issues. In this regard, he has written to the Opposition leaders requesting their specific written input on the options laid out in the report of the working group to examine defects in housing and any additional steps they believe should be undertaken to meet these challenges. The Minister would like to thank those who have responded to date and would encourage those who have yet to do so to submit their proposals for his consideration as soon as possible. The Minister would also like to see some practical details included in the proposals and has requested, in particular, that relevant detail on administration, implementation and costings accompany the proposals.

This Government fully acknowledges the calls that homeowners and residents need support at the earliest possible opportunity and I assure the House that the Government is committed to addressing this issue as a matter of priority. The Government's commitment is demonstrated by the fact that one of the Minister's first actions when he took office was to establish the working group to examine the defects in housing. In response to Deputy Ó Broin, I can say that the regulations for the defective concrete blocks grant scheme will be published in January. The establishment of the working group was an important initial step as it was the first time that we could establish the scale of the issue involved. I reiterate the Minister's thanks to all members of the working group for the considerable work they undertook in a relatively short period of time. The scale of the issue we are trying to address is quite substantial. It is worth reiterating that the number of apartments and duplexes constructed between 1991 and 2013 affected by one or more of fire safety, structural safety and water ingress defects is likely to range between 50% and 80%. That equates to between 62,500 and 100,000 apartments or duplexes built within this time period. The average cost of undertaking the remediation of defects is likely to be approximately €25,000 per apartment or duplex, which translates to a potential overall total remediation of between approximately €1.56 billion and €2.5 billion. It is no small task to determine how best to put in place support for affected homeowners in a considered and structured way. To this end, as the Minister informed the Dáil earlier today, a number of steps have been taken to progress the implementation of the working group's report to ensure that the affected homeowners are provided with the support they need.

We have taken a number of steps to progress the implementation of the working group's report to ensure the affected homeowners are provided with the support they need. This includes the establishment of an interdepartmental and agency group, the establishment of an advisory group to develop a code of practice and considerable consultation with relevant stakeholders and homeowners' representative groups. He intends to bring a memorandum to Government next week, which will seek Government approval of the next stage in the process. As is evident from the detail that has been outlined to the House, a considerable amount of work is being undertaken and this reflects the urgency this Government believes is necessary to address the issue for affected homeowners. This is in the context of the finding of the working group that there is no single cause of defects. The working group determined that defects tend to arise due to a variety of design, product inspection, supervision and workmanship issues occurring either in isolation or in various combinations. However, as recognised by the working group in its report, given that the overall potential scale and estimated cost to fix the problem is so considerable, it will take many years to address all buildings affected. Resources and works will therefore need to be prioritised. In this regard it would not be appropriate for those in charge of defective buildings to delay the undertaking of any remediation work that is considered necessary from a life safety point of view. It is worth remembering that persons having control of premises, including apartment and duplex buildings, have statutory fire safety responsibilities under the fire services Act. The person having control may be an individual person, a number of persons or an organisation such as an owners’ management company, approved housing body, real estate investment trust, a housing authority or property services company. In general the person having control is required to guard against the outbreak of fire on the premises and to ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, the safety of persons on the premises in the event of an outbreak of fire.

Given the scale of the apartments potentially affected, the defects working group report advised on the importance of planning, prioritising and adequately resourcing any programme to address defects. In this light the Minister, Deputy O’Brien, is working to bring forward as quickly as possible specific proposals to Cabinet followed by new legislation, interim measures and administrative processes to respond to the report of the working group to examine defects in housing. I will conclude by reiterating this Government’s commitment to assist affected homeowners who need support to address defects that have manifested in their apartments and duplexes through no fault of their own. This has been a useful debate. The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, looks forward to updating colleagues in the Dáil following the approval of the memorandum to Government which he plans to bring to Cabinet next week.