Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 23 April 2013
Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Select Sub-Committee on Public Expenditure and Reform
Estimates for Public Services 2013
Vote 11 - Public Expenditure and Reform (Revised)
Vote 12 - Superannuation and Retired Allowances (Revised)
Vote 13 - Office of Public Works (Revised)
Vote 14 - State Laboratory (Revised)
Vote 15 - Secret Service (Revised)
Vote 16 - Valuation Office (Revised)
Vote 17 - Public Appointments Service (Revised)
Vote 18 - Shared Services (Revised)
Vote 19 - Office of the Ombudsman (Revised)
2:45 pm
Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source
As I understand it, the issue is that at times, the insurance industry claims not to know that a significant programme has been carried out in a particular area that previously had been geocoded as a flood risk. In Germany, for instance - this came up in my discussions with some of these stakeholders in the area - a protocol or code of conduct, which is called a certification process, is in place.
Given that some major insurance companies are based in Germany it is a framework with which they are familiar. At the end of a process the insurance companies, the OPW and the local authorities could have a certification process on which everyone signs off to ensure compliance. The insurance companies would be right to say that it is fine to build, for example, a culvert to rectify the problem but the local authority has a responsibility to manage it on an ongoing basis. It is not sufficient just to build a culvert if it is filled up with debris, including sofas and tyres, in six months’ time, as was the case in Blackpool recently. The certification process must include a monitoring element. Is the Minister of State thinking along the lines of a certification process to which the insurance industry would have to subscribe in terms of his proposed meeting with the Irish Insurance Federation?
No comments