Mr. Kevin Hollingsworth:

Deputy Ó Broin asked specifically about the potential high-level study. He touched on the issue of accidental discovery, which is one methodology used to fund issues. People also go looking for problems because the matter is in the media. There is another cohort of people who have not looked, do not want to look or are totally oblivious to this matter. The number of latent defects over the past three years is scary. I have remediated 28 multi-unit developments. Eleven of them are privately owned and funded by members to keep them out of the media and I am working on eight developments at present. Only two weeks ago I sat in front of an extraordinary general meeting, EGM, and told people they would have to pay €7,500 to remediate defects. That situation is the genesis of our submission and it cannot continue. The cause of these issues was, in my opinion, the Building Control Act 1990.

We have not had enough time to evaluate the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations. It appears positive from the level of professional involvement and oversight but 27 years after the introduction of the 1990 regulations, it has been confirmed that self-certification was a bad decision and we have been left with legacy issues. It is too early in the BCAR process. From the society's involvement, we know there is a much higher level of on-site oversight and questions are being asked. We do not think the process is perfect and improvements can be made.

We were asked for international comparisons. I finished my education in the UK. I worked between the UK and Australia for a decade before coming here. In response to Deputy Casey's specific point, internationally, if the building control officer is on site and the trench is open, the concrete does not normally arrive until the next day. It does not arrive until the building control officer assesses whether the foundations have been dug adequately and the soil has good bearing capacity. It is only then that the foreman rings. The building control officer is always present and he or she is independent and unimpeachable. The system works. Ireland uses a hybrid system that is unique when compared internationally, as stated by Mr. Baldwin. Resources are a barrier to having an international system. Deputy Casey mentioned that the by-laws were disbanded in 1990 and replaced by self-certification. It would be incredibly difficult to ramp up the system immediately so there must be a staging process. Ms Hegarty mentioned there is a facility to have authorised persons appointed by the local authority. That aspect could deal with the undercutting that she pointed out. Mr. Baldwin also touched on the need for an oversight tsar. We have that provision with HIQA and the Financial Regulator. We need it in the construction industry for both the actual construction and the local authorities. We need to know the types of inspections, how many are being done and whether they are at key stages. Somebody needs to monitor the entire construction industry.

To answer some of the Chairman's questions on how the local authority monitors red flag issues and whether the assigned certifier has changed matters, as we have said, we do not know how much of that has actually and tangibly been undertaken. The skills shortage is key.

We would have been churning out, through Dundalk Institute of Technology, an average of 50 graduates per year. Last year and this year it will only be 13. We will have to wait another four years before that is back up to 50.

Another issue is the professionals appointed to act as assigned certifiers, including chartered engineers, registered building surveyors and registered architects. The proper professionals are building control officers but we have no building control course in this country. The Irish system we have created is putting people in who are not specialists in the field in which they are asked to work. There is no short solution to that problem. I hope I have answered all the questions.