The law of the land is clear. Section 39(10)(b) of the defective concrete blocks Act 2022 sets out the powers of the appeals board.

It may direct the Housing Agency or a local authority to reconsider a decision in line with the board's directions or it may replace the decision entirely with a new determination. That is what the Oireachtas intended. That is the safeguard homeowners were told they had but in place is a safeguard that is an absolute fiction. Of the appeals heard so far, the panel has found serious and significant errors of law in the Housing Agency's decisions. These are not minor matters but fundamental failures. When this has happened, every one of these cases has been sent straight back and the homeowners have been left under absolute pressure with no decisions made. Not once have these been overturned. The only power the appeals board never uses is the one that would work, which is delivering justice.

Instead of independent appeals we have a closed loop where the State appeals to itself, reviews itself and then reaffirms its own decisions, sometimes doing nothing more than tidying up the paperwork. This is not independence; this is institutional self-protection. It leaves homeowners trapped in the same system that failed them, with their homes still crumbling down around them. No other appeals body in the State operates this way, not in planning appeals, not in social welfare appeals and not in procurement appeals. In every other system, when the original decision-maker gets it seriously wrong, they do not get the chance to make that decision again so why is this the standard for people and families with defective concrete homes?

This week amendments are being brought forward to legislation the Government says is intended to improve the scheme for applicants. This is now essential because the Housing Agency has made failed decisions and it should not be given a second opportunity to do this. It is an error of law that has been identified. The appeals board must be required to use the power given to it by statute to issue a replacement decision and the Housing Agency must be removed from the appeals process. This will cost the State nothing. It will restore fairness and transparency. Homeowners deserve a real appeal not a circular motion dressed up as due process. They deserve a system that protects them. The Government amendment Bill this week will make it explicit that where the appeals board finds a significant error of law or fact, the board must issue a replacement decision and a case cannot be sent back to the Housing Agency that made the flawed decision in the first place. It is a really simple; it is a "Yes" or a "No".

I thank the Deputy. The current Government and the previous one stepped up to support many households affected by defective concrete blocks. That is reflected in the increased allocation in recent years. Over 2025 funding increased by over 50% and following the Revised Estimates process, the budget for homes damaged by the use of defective concrete blocks increased by a further €60 million, bringing the revised allocation to €130 million. As the scheme ramps up, additional funding will be provided to support the households who are progressing through the scheme.

The Government is also making sure the scheme is designed and delivered in a manner that meets the real needs of homeowners in an efficient and fair manner. I know the Deputy asked about the appeals process. Appeals are covered by a statutory process under the appeals panel, led by a senior counsel and with experts from the legal and engineering professions appointed by the Minister under a clear and transparent process managed by the Public Appointments Service. The appeals system is an independent statutory function under the 2022 legislation and it has now begun to issue the terminations to appellants and has accelerated its work in recent weeks.

Section 39 of the Act states that:

Where it is considers it necessary for the purpose of ensuring fair procedures in the consideration of an appeal, the Appeal Board may require a party of the appeal to provide the Appeal Board ... such further information in writing as the Appeal Board considers necessary, and ... [they will be] given an opportunity to make submissions in relation to that information.

The appeal board has been writing to the Housing Agency seeking clarification in some instances in an effort to assist homeowners in their cases. We have clear statutory provisions. It is independent, which is important to keep the fairness and integrity in the appeals mechanism within the scheme.

The programme for Government also commits to undertaking a planned review of the legislation underpinning the scheme. This refers to the fact that the legislation mandates the Minister to review the scheme within three years of the Act's commencement, so that is by July 2026. All aspects of the Act will be kept under review, including the appeals process. If changes are required they may be made then, and not through the current amendment Bill which is focused on other matters at this time, particularly increasing the amount of money paid to homeowners.

We have a clear and transparent process that is set out and reflected in the legislation. If you take the procedures that are set out and the nomination process that is guided through that, it is important that that is allowed to do its work in the context of appeals that are made.

My constituents are coming into the office all the time and are contacting us. Their lives are being determined by the decisions of the Housing Agency as to whether they can rebuild their house and move on with their lives. When they request evidence behind the life-changing decisions, they receive black pages with ink all over them. It is heavily redacted. FOI was sought and refused and then overturned by the Information Commissioner. This is not transparency.

Even more alarming is the Housing Agency record retention policy. Section 7, page 8, allows draft versions of files replaced by the final versions to be disposed of. Destroying records in these circumstances is indefensible. It undermines accountability and violates best record keeping standards. It fuels fears among the homeowners that there is stuff going on.

Will the Minister immediately order the Housing Agency to preserve all records and release unredacted evidence underpinning these decisions? This is a simple "Yes" or "No" question. Just give me a "Yes" or "No" answer to that question.

I have set out the legislative provisions underpinning the appeals process. It is clear that neither the Minister nor the Department has any influence on the operation of the appeals that exist. Any involvement is purely on an administrative basis.

All public bodies hold records and have a duty to provide information as appropriate. Maybe it is withheld because of particular matters relating to the privacy of an individual. I do not know the facts behind every FOI or release of information which has been requested. It depends on each particular case connected to the Housing Agency's involvement.

We have an independent statutory function set up to oversee appeals. That is, as I said, done with independent people appointed by the Public Appointments Service. If any changes are required to the operation of the appeals, that can be considered in the context of the three-year review which is set out under the current legislation.