Amendment No. 2 in the name of Deputy Charles Ward has been ruled out of order as it involves a potential charge on the Revenue.
Sentiment score: -0.15
Amendments Nos. 3, 13, 62 and 74 are consequential on amendment No. 63. Amendments Nos. 3, 13, 62, 63 and 74 are related and may be discussed together.
Sentiment score: -0.06
Amendment No. 4 has been deemed out of order as there is a potential charge on the Revenue.
Sentiment score: -0.15
Amendments Nos. 5 to 7, inclusive, and amendment No. 60 are related and may be discussed together.
Sentiment score: -0.10
There are a few points I wish to make on these amendments. First, option B is what a lot of people in County Clare are getting. It means that outer and inner leaf will have to eventually be demolished, but the roof has to be kept. That is what they are being told. They are all telling me it is impossible to get a contractor. When contractors come out and look at the property, they wonder whether they are going to put stilts under the roof or prop up the roof and ask where they will start the demolition and where they will start the rebuild. The remediation options are not working. As Deputy O'Donoghue said, all building works, small and large, have to be certified and that is proving to be nigh on impossible. It is becoming a churn, whereby remediation options are given and then rejected because no one will stand over them and then they go back in again. That is not working. I remember when we had the large Bill. It was a big evening of vote after vote on Committee Stage, as other speakers said. That evening, the former Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, rather clumsily said, in a retort across the Chamber, that it was taxpayer's money that would pay for the scheme. Many Deputies in the Opposition and on the Government backbenches, as well as member of the media, noted that the people who are affected are the taxpayers of Ireland. It is their homes that are falling in. In an appeasement that evening, which gave great hope to many of us, we heard there was going to be a landmark legal case taken by the State and the Attorney General was preparing a huge case against the quarries and the concrete block manufacturers, one of which is one of the biggest companies in Europe, Roadstone, which is part of CRH. Let us name that company and put a face to this. There was to be a landmark legal case taken so the companies would pay and rather than the taxpayers paying, it would actually be the companies that were culpable that would pay for all of this. I ask the Minister to give the House an update on that. I understand it is a colossal case and it will be challenged. The Minister is a good person but we need to hear there is some movement on that case because someone should pay for this. At the moment, this is on the pages of the Government. It is taxpayer's money funding remediation for taxpayers but someone has to pay for this. The levy in itself is not sufficient. That landmark case must be taken. It would be a bit of retribution, which this country needs. As we were preparing for this Dáil week and printing off our briefing notes, I got an interesting email from someone at home in Clare. There is a recurring theme and I am guessing it is similar in Donegal, Mayo and other places. It was from a builder who stated there is probably a little bit of pyrite or mica in every single block. It is a chemical constituent that is in the ground. It is mined and gets mixed in a batching plant. If there is sufficient cement in the concrete block and it has a decent constitution, it will probably withstand that. In anything I have seen, the common theme is deterioration of the concrete, crumbling and asymmetrical cracking. When I look at the gable end of these houses, I always ask the person if they got pumped insulation. They will say they did and when I ask when, they will say about three years ago. I will then ask when the cracks began and they will say it was about two years ago. It is a common theme. The builder who emailed said we should have our debate and talk about 100% redress and the legal aspects but someone has to scream about the SEAI grants. While they are essential - I am not saying we should scrap or pause them - someone has to give some advisory note to people who are applying for SEAI grants that the house that is beautifully painted and standing proud may become more susceptible. For all we know, there could be deleterious material in those blocks that will be activated when they bore through them and start pumping material into them, which causes water and chemical agents to engage with the blocks. What I am getting at is that I have yet to come across a case that did not involve pumped insulation of cavity walls. Cautionary guidance notes need to be issued that pumped insulation is some form of catalyst. I am not saying the pumped beading is wrong but it gives rise to some chemical reaction that starts to break down blocks. Yet, we are in overdrive with SEAI grants. The people I spoke with in Clare on Monday night said that someone has to scream that this has been a catalyst in their homes and there needs to be a re-examination of the scheme.
Sentiment score: -0.01