Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

I welcome many aspects of this Bill but want to highlight a number of concerns. Strengthening the enforcement powers is a very positive feature and it is to the fore of the provisions. However, it is critical that it be in accord with the last paragraph of the explanatory memorandum to the Bill, which states: "The staffing and financial implications are being assessed and will be addressed during the enactment of the Bill". As has already been said, without people to enforce the legislation it will be merely academic.

The Minister's predecessor, or his predecessor's predecessor, made a commitment that local authorities would not be given additional responsibilities without providing them with the necessary resources. This is important to ensuring the practicality of the legislation.

I very much welcome the introduction of disability access certification. Part M of the building regulations quite obviously required more than legislation. Disability groups' expectations of a significant improvement in access to buildings resulted in frustration when they were not acted upon as envisaged. It is therefore very important that whatever can be done is done to ensure the legislation is implemented in practice.

Local authorities are very much on the delivery end and it is critical they have the power and resources to ensure significant improvements in this area. Refusing to allow a building to be opened without its having a disability access certificate is a very positive and welcome move. It is not open to interpretation, it is in your face and very useful. I want to ensure this is achieved. That additional powers are required indicates there is a profile of non-compliance by developers. It is important we increase the maximum penalties for breaches of national regulations. The guarantee of professional expertise across a range of disciplines is critical. It has already been said that we will not notice the effects of not having such a guarantee now but in years to come, when the flaws start to show up. We are starting to see the flaws of the last building boom at this stage. I have drawn attention to the manifestation of this problem in other areas.

While the measures I have mentioned are welcome, questions about enforcement need to be asked when additional powers and responsibilities are granted. I will continue to raise the issue of enforcement because I am familiar with this problem as it exists at local authority level. People are being shifted in and out due to the patchwork response that is to be expected when inadequate resources are made available. It is not right that the per capita levels of staffing are lowest in the areas with the highest level of development. County Meath, which has a similar population to County Kerry, has 700 employees in this area whereas County Kerry has 1,200 employees. The cracks start to show up when there is a disparity, essentially. It is difficult to see how a staffing level like that can exist in the context of an embargo unless special attention is paid to it. I recently attended a meeting in County Kildare, to which all the local Members of the Oireachtas were invited. We were told at the meeting that 800 unauthorised developments had been notified to the local authority in the last four years. I am sure many such developments were not notified to the local authority. We should all be concerned about the issue of compliance.

One aspect of this legislation that is of particular concern to me relates to regularisation certificates. I understand buildings may need to be regularised if mistakes are made, for example, but they should attract the same kind of penalties. One should have to pay more for a planning retention than for a planning application.

See this speech in context