I will bring the Taoiseach back to 29 November 1989. The Taoiseach had been recently elected and was supporting a Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government, led by former Deputy Charles Haughey. The Dáil was debating the Building Control Act, which introduced a regime of self-certification, allowing builders effectively to sign off on projects themselves. Former Deputy 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.

What was the response of the Fianna Fáil Minister, former Deputy Pádraig Flynn? He said: "If Deputy Gilmore buys a building without having put in place some checks and without having carried out checks, then he is the one who is being negligent in protecting his own investment." That is incredible. The Minister was blaming the residents and not the builders. Fianna Fáil opened the door for the kind of defective building we have seen.

Here we are, 33 years on and the fruits of that policy are becoming crystal clear. According to the report commissioned by the Government and released in July, up to 100,000 apartments and houses around the State are likely affected by defects, mostly fire defects. That includes Hunterswood, Park West Crescent, Carrickmines Green, a recent development in Inchicore and many others, the owners of which do not yet want their developments named yet. That is only the tip of the iceberg. Most people who are affected do not yet know it yet. There are probably significant defects in any apartment or duplex built between 1991 and 2013. Those homeowners will have a very unwelcome surprise coming in the form of a bill of an average of €25,000. For many, it will be much more than that. It is money that people simply do not have. Contrary to what the then Minister, Pádraig Flynn, was suggesting, that is not their fault. They did everything right when they bought their property. It is why residents have come together to launch a campaign called Not Our Fault. They are calling a major public conference open to all affected in a few weeks' time.

The Government has had the expert group report from which these figures come since July. A month ago, the Government set up another group, an interdepartmental and agency group, to look into the issue. The people who are living with the fruits of Fianna Fáil policy know what the answer is. It is extremely simple. A 100% redress scheme is the only just solution. It is also the only workable solution. The scheme should be retrospective and the State should then pursue the builders responsible.

Last week, residents in Park West Crescent voted not to pay the €68,500 they were being asked to in order to address fire defects. Residents in Hunterswood did the same a few months ago. Nobody is going to hand over enormous amounts of money now when the Government has not indicated that the scheme will be retrospective. I ask the Government to stop kicking the can down the road. Will the Taoiseach agree to a 100% redress scheme that is retrospective?

No one has been more proactive than the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, in dealing with issues in respect of defective blocks and apartments. He has commissioned the largest and most significant survey of apartment defects in this country. He has the results of that report. He has indicated repeatedly to the House that he will be bringing forward a scheme by the end of this year in respect of apartment defects. He has already introduced a most comprehensive scheme in respect of mica. A previous Government brought in a scheme in respect of pyrite. In the first instance, those in construction, including builders and in the case of mica, quarries that supplied defective blocks, are responsible. The Government has taken the view that the residents facing such a situation should be looked after. It is not the residents' fault. That has been the clear position of the Government. Responsibility is on the builders, insurers and all the rest, and there should be mechanisms, including bonds, to protect people from defects.

Because of the need for people to live in their primary residence and to have a roof over their head, the Government is going to come forward a with very comprehensive scheme to deal with this, just as we have in respect of mica and other areas as well. Many of these have occurred in more recent times in respect of the apartment defects, but this does not lessen the need to do something about it. I know the Minister met with the Construction Defects Alliance last week and also met with the apartment owner group and network. He is very proactive on this issue and the scheme will be brought forward and published before the end of the year. Deputies will have an opportunity to have an input into that in respect of its precise nature. I have no doubt Deputies will bring forward amendments and make suggestions to the Minister.

We took on many additional recommendations in respect of the mica scheme when we met with representatives of residents, and that is in comparison with the previous scheme that was introduced some years back. The Minister will publish the scheme before the end of the year and we will engage with Members of the House in respect of it.

Stop kicking the can down the road. The Government has the report from July. It is very simple and it sets out the problems and the potential solutions. At the very least, the residents are looking for a commitment from the Taoiseach today that any scheme that will be introduced will be retrospective. Will the Taoiseach answer that question and give a commitment that, regardless of the details of the scheme that is introduced, it will be retrospective? If the Taoiseach does not do that, nothing is going to happen on this issue. Nobody is going to vote to pay €25,000, €30,000, €50,000 or €70,000 to fix defects that are not their fault and when they do not have this money. Give a commitment that the scheme that will be introduced will be retrospective.

Second, give a commitment that this will be a scheme for 100% redress because that is not the scheme that was introduced for the people affected by mica. These people are the victims of cowboy builders. Fianna Fáil, with its regime of self-certification, opened the door for cowboy builders to jump through. Give a guarantee that the State will be funding these costs so that these works actually can be done, because they will not be done if the Government leaves any portion of them up to ordinary people, because they cannot afford it, and then to go on to pursue the builders responsible.

Fianna Fáil did not open the door to anybody-----

It did.

-----and the Deputy should not absolve people who have their own responsibilities, namely, those who build. There is always responsibility-----

You were warned very clearly-----

That is just classic politicking-----

No, it is in the Dáil record.

-----by the Deputy and political spin. I am more interested in getting this issue resolved for the residents.

Then do it.

The bottom line is, as the Deputy knows, the Minister brought a memorandum to Government in September and informed us of the content of the report he had published in July, outlining the scale of the issue, where 100,000 apartments have been impacted with a potential cost of approximately €1.56 billion to €2.5 billion - within that range. The Minister will bring proposals on this scheme to the Cabinet before the end of the year and all of the issues the Deputy has referred to are under examination. I am not going to pre-empt what the Minister is going to bring to the Cabinet.

Will the Taoiseach at least commit to the scheme being retrospective?

We are now well into October and it is not too long until the end of the year. No one is kicking any can down the road. This is a very significant issue. We have already allocated up to €2.8 billion for the mica scheme and a further €1 billion for pyrite. These issues have to be taken seriously. They involve a great deal of expenditure on behalf of the taxpayer. We take our responsibilities seriously and go through it in a proper and serious-minded way.