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.

Sentiment score: -0.01