Mr. Aidan O'Connor:

It is in the information supplied. The Act sets out clear legal standards that have to be met in the building regulations. It states the regulations simply; the builder must comply with health and safety standards for the building. It goes on to provide detailed guidance in the technical guidance documents, sometimes referred to as TGDs, which tell builders how, if they build in accordance with those documents, they are compliant. Builders rely on those very strongly. The burden of responsibility for compliance rests first and foremost on the developers under section 8(3)(a). Designers come under section 8(1)(b) and building owners under section 8(3)(a). The Act covers that. The statutory responsibility is for professionals who design according to the regulations and the responsibility for enforcing compliance rests with the building regulation local authority, over 37 local authorities in the country. There is a cascade of responsibilities. The role of the Minister is to provide regulations. In our daily role we work within the building standards section so we are working on those regulations and on their proposed revision.

BRAB would have had a role in initiating a fresh look at building regulations and asking what should happen. Two studies were made by committees within the body which looked at the regulations and how they could be brought forward. There was a larger, more general study and a small detailed submission and these became the advice on revision to the Minister. To clarify, the Minister does not have any role in the enforcement activity - that is delegated to local authorities. That issue is sometimes misunderstood. Developers and owners are responsible first and foremost because they initiate the work and compliance rests clearly on them. In this regard the Act enables a local authority to issue an enforcement notice which is issued under the Building Control Act.

I refer to Priory Hall. It is interesting to remember that the action was taken under the Fire Safety Act, another piece of legislation, which took priority over the work the building control was developing in Dublin City Council. I can return to that.

Defects have to be remediated. There are statutory requirements which become the measure by which one can state the correct way to deal with a matter if there is a dispute on site or in the course of construction. The requirement becomes the reference whereby the issue can be resolved on site. If it does not get resolved there the result might be legal action, as we outlined in detail, and the matter can end up in the High Court, as we know. However, there are other issues which could be dealt with beforehand. The Act gives local authorities powers to scrutinise proposals, inspect work in progress, serve enforcement notices for non-compliance under the Building Control Act, institute proceedings for breaches of regulations and seek High Court injunctions for non-compliance. If there is failure to comply there is a fine of €5,000 on summary prosecution which can rise to €50,000, and imprisonment. One can be both fined and imprisoned, in a first case for six months and in a second for up to two years.

A target has been set for inspection rates of between 12% and 15%. This is more like an audit inspection approach for any building that has a valid commencement notice. That notice triggers the action to be taken and whether there will be an inspection on site. Statistics show that, in general, there is an average inspection rate of about 24% on all buildings taken into account. It is up to the local authorities to apply their endeavours in this regard. The Building Control Act also provides for a statutory process in regard to fire safety certificates and disability access. Both are dealt with as separate items. It was on the fire safety certificate side that action was taken in the case of Priory Hall. That highlights most of the points.

In the proposed new regulations, we are to commence section 6(2)(a)(i) of the Building Control Act 1990, a section that was never enacted. It requires the submission to building control authorities of certificates of compliance that certify whether a building is in compliance with the regulations. That obviously did not happen in the cases mentioned. What happened was that others filled that gap with opinions of compliance. We can go into that in further detail. The proposals aim to change the regulations by requiring the submission of drawings and documentation that demonstrate compliance with the building regulations. There is a statutory form of the certificate of compliance. We have worked this through with the stakeholders, we have an agreement and the Minister is bringing that forward. The statutory forms will have regulations governing how they are used. There is a code of practice lying behind this. There is also an engagement with the City and County Managers Association, with a view to taking a regionalised shared services approach model to the administration of building control. We will then have standardised approaches and common protocols.

The reason for this is to try to ensure some kind of nationwide consistency. Experience with disability access certificates, DACs, reinforces our belief in the need for that because if something is not adequately described or defined, then people can be very free in their interpretation of what is intended.

The proposed regulations were released for public consultation earlier in the year. We received over 500 submissions in respect of them, which was a record. Normally, we would receive approximately 20 or 30 submissions in connection with matters of this nature. The Department reviewed these submissions and consulted directly with the key stakeholders who put some of them forward. We then developed a stakeholder group in order to advance the detail. We also established a study group which was tasked with defining the code of practice relating to how the legislation will be applied.

To put it in its simplest form, it involves a chain of responsibility. The designer will take responsibility for the design being compliant and the contractor will take responsibility for building what is envisaged in compliance with the regulations. The latter will be able to rely on the former's drawings and specifications in order to ensure compliance. There will also be a separate assigned certifier who will be a competent professional charged with overseeing projects and ensuring that the requisite standards are applied. Effectively, this person will act as an independent assessor in respect of those standards. The reference in this regard will be the code of practice. An inspection programme will be established by the certifier and this will be in place for the entirety of the project. Certificates and ancillary certificates will be supplied in order to support all of the relevant detail. Effectively, there will be a large file in respect of each job. The detail to which I refer will be submitted to local authorities by electronic means. This is how we see the system being strengthened.

Everybody knows the history of what occurred at Priory Hall so I will not go into it. However, what happened there was treated as a fire safety issue. There is an ongoing resolution process in respect of Priory Hall, which is being conducted by Mr. Justice Joseph Finnegan and in which the parties are still actively involved. This process arose in the context of the adjournment of an appeal which Dublin City Council brought in respect of obtaining an order from the High Court regarding the payment of costs. The Department understands that the appeal is due for mention before the Supreme Court on 18 October next. Given that the matter is before the courts, it would not be appropriate for us to comment on it. I will state that some work appears to be going on and that this is being led by Mr. Justice Finnegan. We hope this represents an opportunity to develop matters.