Mr. Joe Kennedy:

Turning to our recommendations, the health and safety of the public and occupants of new dwellings that may result from implementation of this Bill must be its primary intent. The Bill should be aligned with a revised version of SI 9 as envisaged in the Safe as Houses? report of last December. The draft Planning and Development (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2018 support the exemption of vacant town centre properties for change of use to residential under the Planning Acts. We would support the introduction of that definition into the Bill. The Bill should avoid introducing a third system of building control to this small country. Specific guidance to ensure the competency of the authorised person and the panel of relevant professionals and authorised persons should be set out or provided for in the Bill. We do not support the revision of the TGDs as proposed in the Bill. The Bill should be limited to two years in order to avoid perpetuating unintended consequences and should be aligned with other relevant regulations at the conclusion of that period after review. A definition of "vacant house" or "vacant buildings" and the period for which they should be unoccupied to be considered vacant should be included. The Bill should provide for first and third party appeals. Local authorities have to be given adequate resources to deal with the additional workload.