Last week, I warned this House that the Housing Agency is stretching IS 465 to exclude homeowners from the defective concrete block remediation scheme. At least one engineer is saying they will not fix defective homes, ignoring the criteria IS 465 sets out for defective blocks. The Government cannot hide behind technical language while families are left unsafe in their homes. What I am raising today confirms that this is not a mistake. It is a pattern and this pattern is now putting people in danger. I am aware of multiple cases where homeowners who clearly meet the eligibility criteria under IS 465 are being refused access to the scheme by engineers employed by the Housing Agency. These are not marginal cases. They are homes in which the mica content is above 6%. They fall under group 4 as regards damage and are officially classified as dangerous buildings. Anyone with eyes in their head can see these homes contain defective concrete and yet these applications were refused.

The agency's own words are clear. In one case, it said that, having considered IS 465:2018, as amended in 2020, it was appropriate that the decision in the case was refusal due to the building damage not being caused by the use of defective blocks containing excessive amounts of certain deleterious materials. Let us be clear about this: mica is a deleterious material. Under IS 465, any building incorporating deleterious materials qualifies under the damage threshold and is eligible for remediation. Even if the engineers claim mica is not the sole cause, the blocks are defective under the IS 465 standard. The cause is not the issue. The law and the standard are completely clear. Residents deserve protection right now.

Access is also being denied due to so-called external sulphate attack. Leading scientists advise that external sulphate attack would only reasonably be expected below the damp-proof coursing of the house, that is, in the groundwork and soil below the bell cast. Despite this, detailed IS 465 testing did not examine below the damp-proof course. The very location most at risk was not tested.

Let me be clear: these actions have real-world consequences. People living in extremely unsafe homes are told the damage to those homes was not caused by defective concrete. They are then instructed to pay for further testing out of their own pocket, costing thousands. When they challenge that decision, they are forced into an appeals process that sends the case back to the engineers who made the decision in the first place, so we are going around in a loop. This is not an appeals process. It is a circular State-sanctioned loop.

Will the Taoiseach instruct the Minister for housing and the Housing Agency to immediately stop using this flawed interpretation of IS 465 and to review the decisions in these test cases to protect homeowners? It is a simple yes or no. I know how much the scheme cost and exactly what is involved in it. I just need a yes or a no so that we can look at these test cases and move on.

We are moving on in respect of this scheme. The scheme is expected to cost in excess of €2.2 billion. Government is committed to that. That is a key fact and decision. As the Deputy will know, it is estimated that close to 3,000 homeowners are now at various stages of the scheme. That was the figure at the end of August 2025. A lot of people are engaging with the scheme and a lot of cases are being progressed. The grant rates, which were increased in 2024, are based on expert advice and are set at a level that ensures homeowners will get the money they need to put their homes right. As the Deputy will know, there have been ongoing improvements and changes. To ensure the grant scheme followed the most up-to-date science, changes were made to the scheme late in 2024 to take account of the most recent research. A forthcoming Bill will make amendments to the grant scheme to allow these changes to be implemented by the administrators of the grant scheme, which happen to be the local authorities. The Bill will also allow for an increase of up to 10% in grant rates and payments under the scheme.

The Deputy spoke about IS 465 and determinations that have been made. There is an appeals mechanism. By definition, an appeals mechanism has to be independent. The Deputy is saying that we should intervene to change the determinations. It is a statutory process under an appeals panel that is led by a senior counsel and which includes experts from the legal and engineering professions. The panel is appointed by the Minister in a clear and transparent way, which is managed on his behalf by the Public Appointments Service. It is through that service that people are selected to go on the panels. The appeals system is an independent statutory function under the defective concrete blocks Act of 2022. It has now begun to issue determinations to appellants. It has accelerated its work in recent weeks. I will alert the Minister to the fact that the Deputy has raised this issue today but I do not see an alternative to an independent statutory system to hear appeals. There has to be an objective and independent process to hear appeals in cases where people have not been allowed into the scheme. However, I will certainly alert the Minister to what the Deputy has raised.

There are 3,000 people on the scheme. I am one of them. Some 300 houses have been built and another 300 are going through that process. At this rate, it will be 150 years before we get 10,000 houses done and we have 25,000 to do. Materials are coming in that IS 465 needs to recognise. That is where the fault is. The appeals board is independent in name only. There is an issue with that, which I will raise with the Taoiseach at a later point. It has been clearly indicated that there are serious structural dangers with the scheme's design. Will the Taoiseach tell the Minister for housing to look at these test cases? I just need the Minister to look at these test cases. That is what I need to move forward. If he will accept this, it will help to change what is currently going on.

I will talk to the Minister and ask him to look at these test cases and to revert to the Deputy after doing so. We want to make this work.