The Minister is aware that I have a background in construction and know what I am talking about when it comes to construction. I acknowledge the report of the mica working group and the urgency of getting 100% redress in a speedy fashion for the families affected in Mayo, Donegal and other counties, including Limerick. I have cases in Limerick dating from the late 1980s to 2006. All of the block materials used in the houses in question came from outside County Limerick, not from quarries in Limerick.

I will address a separate issue related to pyrite. I recently read the Surveyors Journal, which provides an update on industry news and is published by the SCSI. I have a copy with me. It states:

Once the problem is confirmed to be pyrite, a solicitor should be consulted to review the various contracts, guarantees or warranties and insurances in place, and to establish whether legal action should be taken to recover costs for the work from a third party. To date the courts have generally found that liability rests with the quarry owner.

Has the Government tried to get compensation for homeowners from wherever the blocks originated? What about the manufacturers' insurance, for example, loss of business or business interruption insurance? What about the banks' part in this? They assess risk and charge accordingly. They got this one wrong. To give the people 100% redress the Minister must go after the insurance of the quarries and banks. Insurance companies charge every householder big insurance premiums to insure their houses. If the Minister gives 100% redress, will he give a guarantee that he will go after the banks that taxpayers bailed out? It is time they paid us back.

HomeBond, in a report, has taken the view that it is not legally obliged to provide compensation and that liability for major defects only applies when a defect is the result of negligence on the part of a third party or a builder, or their subcontractors. Following previous court rulings, HomeBond has said that the quarries are liable under the Liability for Defective Products Act 1991. This is the shocking part. That statement was printed in 2012 when we had a Fine Gael-led Government. The then Minister with responsibility for housing, Deputy Alan Kelly, who is present, gives out to the Government all the time, yet he did nothing about it at the time. In 2012, the Deputy, as part of a Fine Gael-led Government, sat on their hands and did nothing about it but he can sit on the Opposition side.

The Deputy has the wrong Minister and the wrong timeline.

I have full confidence in the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, to sort out a problem handed to him by Fine Gael and the Labour Party.

I thank Deputy O'Donoghue for his questions. As I have said previously, those who are responsible should contribute towards remediation. I have engaged intensively with the Attorney General on this matter and he is working on mechanisms to ensure wrongdoing and liability on the part of quarries and other parties are fully penalised.

I recognise the report from 2012 because I was heavily involved in the pyrite scheme. There was provision in the original Act for payments to be made into the scheme. I believe HomeBond made a payment of €2 million - that was it - under the previous scheme. With Government colleagues, I intend to engage with stakeholders on this and pursue and identify those who have been found to have been responsible for this. The Government is stepping in because, as I have said previously, we have a moral responsibility. Legally, however, there are others who are responsible.

We must also look at the Statute of Limitations. This was something from the original expert report that goes back to previous times. I produced legislation at the time in the Seanad that addressed when the Statute of Limitations would start. We are doing a bit of work on that too. The Statute of Limitations would only kick in on the date on which a person receives independent verification of a defect to his or her home as opposed to when someone, who would not be an expert, believes there may be a problem.

The Deputy is correct that there are things we can do. We have also engaged a senior engineer, Mr. Ford, to issue a report on the scheme. Included in this is identifying and pursuing wrongdoing in this area. We must learn the lessons of the past with regard to standards. Where there are any revisions or changes needed to standards and process, I will bring them forward. Provision was made for a levy in the 2012 Act but a levy was never introduced, for whatever reason.

I am looking at all options but those options will not change what I plan to do with the scheme. We must pursue this, and I have said that to homeowners also who were very anxious that those who are responsible are pursued. I intend to do that as best I can legally, on behalf of the State. I will keep the Deputy informed of progress.

The Minister is welcome to Limerick to see the houses we have issues with. I have a question that might help the Minister going forward. Have the quarries found to have had pyrite in their blocks stopped making blocks? If so, how long ago did they stop? This report was done in 2012 so the quarries knew there was an issue at that time. Have those quarries been making blocks since then? Have they added to the problem, in which case they would be liable?

Going forward, people who have pyrite in their houses cannot be liable for excessive insurance policies on their houses. We must make sure that this does not happen. When the 100% redress comes, building regulations are there for a reason. If a person has an insurance claim on his or her house today, that house must be returned to the regulation of today, not the regulation of 20 or 30 years ago. The building standards state that a house must be returned to the existing regulations which stand now.

There are issues around insurance, certainly, and there are issues around certification. When work is done, it should be certified that it is carried out to a standard whereby a person can claim and get insurance again. That was not actually allowed for in the original scheme that was brought forward. We have made progress in that space. I intend to bring that forward as one of my recommendations. That is why I told Deputy Mac Lochlainn earlier that I also intend one of my proposals to be to allow recourse to the scheme a second time, should that be required.

Thankfully, I have seen that in instances where pyrite is in the infill, we have not had to have work redone in that space. I have, however, also met residents that unfortunately have only seen problems occur at homes in counties Clare and Dublin 30 years after the homes had been built

And Limerick.

And Limerick, indeed, which I will also be visiting. I will let the Deputy know when we have a submission there. There is, therefore, much work to do in this space. We have done a lot of work there too. Once the revised scheme is published, however, there will also be more work around standards and how we can help people as best we can. Recourse is really important. Those who are responsible should, in my view, be held accountable.