Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

This is exceptionally interesting. To go back to the issue of the fire safety certificates and the complex buildings, it is positive that Mr. Keeley thinks the revised technical guidance document is moving in the right direction. From the brigade's own assessment, I think about 80% of the appeals by developers against the conditions that were proposed by the brigade were upheld by the board. That seems to be a very high level. From the outside, I wonder is it the case that, on the one hand, there are independent fire safety professionals recommending the highest possible fire safety protection and, on the other hand, there is always a pull around cost, viability etc. Would it be unfair of me to assume that that was part of the consideration? There seems to be no fire safety reason why the proposed conditions would not be accepted. Is it that there is that kind of tension? We see this in other areas of our discussions, in that there is the highest possible standard and then there are those arguments around cost, viability and so on. I ask that question not just to look back at those An Bord Pleanála decisions but also to look forward to the technical guidance document review itself. Are there those same tensions there? That is my first question.

My second picks up on Deputy Duffy's point. If the conversation within the Department and the brigade is we would like to start to change our building regulations to allow, not high-rise buildings, but even mid-rise buildings - below 20 m, for example - I presume, from your point of view, that it is a straightforward issue whereby if that is the direction of travel, here are the fire mitigation measures in terms of the number of stairwells, the number of escapes, the kinds of firebreaks etc.

If Mr. Keeley has anything to share with the committee, we are actively looking at a report on that in the context of another piece of work we are doing. It would be interesting to hear the witnesses' perspectives on what they are looking at in other jurisdictions in terms of what is best practice and what is required. It is clear they are saying that it is not the case that it cannot be done but that if it is being done, protections are required. I am interested in their view on that too.