Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am happy to talk to amendments Nos. 980, 987, 992, 994, 995 and 997 together because they are related. Amendment No. 980 proposes the insertion of the following into section 275:

“other relevant person for the purposes of notice of endangerment for the property” shall include the following:

(a) legal representative, professional, or management firms or individuals managing or responsible for the property registered in an offshore company;

(b) a financial institution or fund which has taken title to the property as a result of a loan;

(c) administrators, liquidators or receivers responsible for the property after a loan, default or repossession; and

(d) parties responsible for the maintenance of a building site or structure which is causing endangerment to an adjoining Protected Structure.

Amendment Nos. 987, 992, 994, 995 and 997 also contain the term "other relevant person" because this would effectively be defined to in the Bill if amendment No. 980 is accepted. This is to address significant issues that have arisen regarding protected structures and their endangerment over the years. The 2000 Act has not been effective regarding a significant number of important protected structures and buildings, including in architectural conservation areas. I am aware of particular issues in Cork, Fingal, Longford, Mayo, Tipperary and Waterford. There have been issues in respect of rural vernacular buildings, grain stores, industrial buildings and vacant religious institutional buildings such as convents where significant issues have arisen, particularly in Cork city and county. Many of these issues arise because the persons, entities or agencies that have a legal interest in or responsibility for the maintenance and management of protected structure are not properly listed in the existing legislation. There have been some significant issues, with legal disputes where the deeds of a property may default to a financial institution, where liquidation arises or where a building or land is part of a distressed asset portfolio that might be traded individually or in a bundle between financial institutions. Issues have also arisen with an offshore entity holding legal ownership and not being contactable. Issues have also arisen in the context of incapacity whereby the owner of a property could be unwell, in a nursing home or resident overseas.

There are also issues in urban areas, including Dublin, with protected structures impacted and left exposed. If these structures are left empty, they can be exposed to arson attacks. This can happen when banks hold deeds and claim that while they do hold them, they have no responsibility for the protection or maintenance of the structure in question and do not take action. The narrow definition relating to the occupier of a structure in the existing legislation and in the Bill is problematic. It needs to be changed.

There are also issues around neglect of adjoining buildings and how that can lead to dry rot or structural issues in protected structures. These amendments - amendment No. 980 is the foundational one - seek to address this issue and put in comprehensive wording in order that there are no situations in the future in which entities or people with direct responsibility evade that responsibility by being offshore, a bank holding the deeds or whatever.

I urge the Minister of State to accept these amendments.