Mr. Hubert Fitzpatrick:

The other point I want to make about Part V is that it is an unreasonable tax on the purchasers of new homes.

I would like to respond to a couple of other points that were raised, one of which related to the concept of bonds. The industry has an ongoing problem with bonds. By and large, many local authorities require open-ended bonds. There is a serious reluctance on the part of local authorities to adequately deal with the taking-in-charge process in a timely manner. This needs to happen so that these bonds, particularly those relating to developments that are well completed, are released on a timely basis. That is why we would support a revised taking-in-charge process after taking-in-charge applications are made to local authorities. Local authorities should have to respond within a fixed period of time, as they have to do in cases of planning applications, outlining the snags on a development that have to be addressed. If local authorities do not respond to taking-in-charge applications within a fixed timeframe, there should be a process for default in the same way that one can get planning by permission by default if a local authority does not address these issues.