Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

Although Deputy Gilmore is our environmental spokesperson, I am taking the Bill on behalf of the Labour Party. As the House will know, I have called for this measure for some time and I very much welcome its publication. I acknowledge the role the Minister played in bringing it to the fore.

The Bill deals with a number of different issues. Central to it is the issue of recognition of titles "architect", "building surveyor" and "quantity surveyor". At the outset, I need to declare an interest, not only on my part but also on that of my wife who will be affected by specific provisions in the Bill.

I will deal with the sequence in which the Bill outlines its proposals, starting with enforcement. The proposals to deal with enforcement are being introduced very late in the day, at a time when, as the Minister said, double the amount of economic activity relative to the rest of the rest of the European Union is taking place in the construction industry. Most of this construction is, in effect, unsupervised. We simply do not know whether what gets built is in accordance with the planning permission granted. Local authorities do not have the capacity, administratively or in terms of inspection, to verify whether this has happened. If the construction industry continues to operate as it is at present — it may not do so at its current and unhealthy speed — at above par levels because of our big infrastructural deficit and growing population, we will be obliged to give serious consideration to the overall area of enforcement and not limit ourselves to the very welcome improvements in fire safety certificates and access for the disabled as provided for in Part M.

I wish to put on the record of the House the summary of a report, Building Controls — Strengthening the System, that was prepared in May 2004. It was compiled by a working party of the Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland, the Institution of Engineers of Ireland, the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and the Society of Chartered Surveyors of Ireland. This is worth consideration because the record of the House should show what was the combined professional input in this area. Members of the bodies to which I refer are all affected and are taking responsibility, as professionals, for a system of responsibility for which they will be accountable. The report states:

The object of this report is to examine the current state of enforcement of the Building Regulations, and the role of mandatory self-certification in developing and maintaining more effective enforcement of the Building Regulations. The report has been prepared by a Working Party of the ACEI (The Association of Consulting Engineers of Ireland), IEI (The Institution of Engineers of Ireland), RIAI (Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland), and SCS (Society of Chartered Surveyors of Ireland).

The report should not be, viewed as a definitive or fixed position on the part of the four Professional Bodies, but is intended as a discussion document outlining the key elements in a self-certification system. If these principles are broadly acceptable, then there would be a need for discussion and dialogue to develop the details of a mandatory self-certification process.

The present Opinions on Compliance system has delivered a reasonable, level of compliance where responsible clients and professionals are concerned.

The reality is that a person with no knowledge or interest in the Regulations, who wishes to evade the system can do so, with all the potential consequences for building standards, safety, and consumer protection. When this is combined with a person prepared to issue an Opinion on Compliance for such buildings, then the limitations of the present system are obvious.

It is unlikely that the level of resources necessary for a full scale approval system covering the design and construction of every building, and involving multi-stage inspections, are or would be available.

Delivering a system which provides for the proper enforcement of the Building Regulations requires moving to a system of mandatory self-certification, based on a strengthened of the Opinions on Compliance system, as proposed in this submission.

Effective self-certification requires the consideration of a range of mechanisms to provide a statutory basis for the system, with effective mechanisms and sanctions to minimise the risk of evasion.

Sanctions will also be required for careless incompetent, negligent, and fraudulent certification will be required.

An audit system would be required so as to monitor the system.

Competence of accountability of certifiers, sanctions, and independent oversight would best be achieved through the registration systems envisaged in the Building Control Bill, and the existing 1969 Engineers Act.

There would be a need to evaluate, in consultation with lawyers and insurers, the impact of a self-certification on civil liability and, consequently, on Professional Indemnity (PI) Insurance premia.

Mandatory self-certification would deliver

—Credible building control enforcement

—Minimum building standards assurance

—Consumer protection

—Level playing field in the market place for compliant designers, builders and construction product/system manufacturers as against the less responsible and non-compliant

—Greater assurance of compliance with public safety requirements

—Minimal level of Government resources required

—Public health and safety.

The essence of that summary — the document is available — complies with some of the views recorded by Deputy Twomey.

There are many cowboys operating and there are many gullible, desperate people who cannot afford even what they are buying at present and are not in any way able to assess the quality or the assurance that it has been built in accordance with the minimum standards. There are many vulnerable people in that position for all the reasons this House knows and time does not allow me to get into it, but the building boom is creating a new level of risk which our children or our children's children will inherit with all the consequences.

While the points made about the first Part of the Bill dealing with the fire safety certificate, Part M on the question of disabled persons' access, and also the increased powers the Minister is proposing to give to local authorities in terms of going straight to the courts and not to the DPP are necessary and welcome, they do not go far enough. I ask the Minister to engage in a new system of self-certification, with a level of responsibility and sanctions on one side and credible professionals on the other, to give us the kind of self-assured standards of construction this country requires into the future. With the registration of title measure, the Minister can now do that. He has the carrot and the stick. The carrot is to require professionals to be registered. I have a few problems with the outline of the structure the Minister has provided but I want to clarify some points.

Now that we are to register the professionals, who are the only ones allowed to use the title architect, quantity surveyor or building surveyor, as Deputy O'Dowd said, we will no longer have to advise people who come to our clinics asking us to recommend someone to do their extension or whatever. We do not have to recommend a dentist or a doctor and we will never again have to recommend an architect, a building surveyor or a quantity surveyor when these provisions come into law, as no doubt they will. Those people who have those titles, however, will no longer be able to afford to lose them and therefore there will be a more strict system of self-regulation, such as we have seen in the financial sector, for example, where it simply is not worth the professional life of an accountant to mess around with tax. Those days are over because of all the fraudulent abuses that were uncovered. I suspect if the same scrutiny was to be applied to the building industry in the broadest level of activity, similar levels of abuse, perhaps with less impact on the revenues to the State, which took the hit with all the tax evasion with the so-called non-resident accounts and so on, would be discovered. The outcome of the inquiry of the Committee of Public Accounts and the other issues that came to light have resulted in a strengthening of legislation for accountants that is at a draconian level such that if a Minister for Finance had attempted to introduce it in the 1970s or 1980s, there would have been an outcry. Indeed, it was brought to my attention recently that one recommendation from the beef tribunal transposed itself into section 153 in the first Finance Act I had to bring in, which had been accepted by my predecessor, Deputy Bertie Ahern, as Minister for Finance. According to Ken Murphy, former Deputy McCreevy and the Minister, Deputy Michael McDowell, this was the end of civilisation as they knew it. This was the end of the Republic. Civil liberties would disappear if these provisions were brought in for tax accountants, financial brokers and advisers. Yet what is now on the Statute Book is 100 times stronger than what was proposed at that time and as a result we have increased revenues, which is for the good of everybody, but it also means the professionals responsible for ensuring citizens are compliant with their tax affairs are no longer prepared to cut corners or put their professional qualifications at risk. If we accept the logic of that argument, transpose it into the construction industry and protect the titles of the professionals involved, we will ensure a safeguard of compliance that we have not had now up to now, and all of us collectively will be better off for it.

Perhaps the Minister's successor in the coalition Government that will succeed this one will have the responsibility to introduce it but I invite the permanent officials beside him to start preparing explanatory memoranda and advisory notes for their successor to start working on it. The Minister, as a parting gift to the Department and to the Custom House, might leave a memo on the desk as he leaves the Department.

See this speech in context