All the FHPA does for a spouse is prevent the family home being sold or mortgaged without the spouse's consent.
It has no effect at all in relation to a property that isn't the family home.
With regard to the family home, it doesn't give the spouse any ownership rights. The spouse has no right to join in decisions affecting the property — should it be extended, should it be rewired, should it be demolished and rebuilt, should it be demolished and not rebuilt? None of these things involves a sale of the house and the FHPA has nothing to say about them.
If the house is sold, the spouse is not entitled to any of the sale proceeds; if it's burnt down, the spouse is not entitled to any of the insurance proceeds. Should the couple die simultaneously leaving no children, the house will go to the owner's family and not the spouse's family (unless the owner makes a will making other arrangements, which is entirely their choice). Should the owner of the house become insolvent, the owner's creditors can pursue the entire value of the house, and not merely half the value as would be the case if the house were jointly owned.
If, as would be the case here, the house were already mortgaged when the couple marry, the mortgage is valid and remains in force despite the fact that the spouse never consented to it. In the event of a default the bank doesn't need the spouse's consent to enforce the mortgage and, if the bank does enforce, and sells, and there's a surplus on the sale, the spouse has no right to any of it.
Tl;dr: All the FHPA Act does is to give the non-owing spouse the power to block the voluntary disposal of the house, or the grant of a mortgage over the house. It doesn't give them any of the other rights of control in relation to the house that an owner would have. It doesn't enhance their inheritance rights in any way. It doesn't grant anything like shared ownership. It doesn't give any right to a share in sale proceeds, insurance proceeds, compensation proceeds, etc relating to the house.