Ms Kathryn Meghen:

I agree with what the witnesses from the SCSI have said, namely, that the independence of the system would be down to the quality and number of ministerial nominees on the board. The CIRI system will come under a lot of public scrutiny. If, within two or three years, it is not standing up to provide robust redress for the consumer, it will have to brought into question. However, the costs of a fully independent or State-sponsored system could be quite considerable. The system has to be set up to be robust and there has to be a majority of ministerial or consumer nominees on the boards.

I also concur with what the SCSI has said with regard to self-builders. There are extreme liabilities on the self-builder. There is also the matter of long-term interest, however. If a house built by a self-builder is subsequently sold, the assurances to the next purchaser are not as considered as they would be if it had been carried out independently. The RIAI provides supports for members working with people engaged in the SI 365 system, but we are very concerned about a two-tier system for construction. There is also the issue of the disclaimer. We are all, unfortunately, instructed by our legal advisers to have disclaimers on our websites. I have not reviewed the CIRI disclaimer but it sounds stronger than might need to be and is probably not in the public interest. We will certainly review it but I have not read it.