Dáil debates

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Construction Contracts Bill 2010 [Seanad]: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Mick WallaceMick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)

This is an interesting Bill and I am glad the Minister has an open mind on it. It is a good start. This is an absolute minefield and people do not appreciate how much trouble lies within it. There are a lot of problems in the industry. It is a crazy industry, and a huge one. It was not just big in the crazy times we have just been through. Construction will always be a huge industry in any country in normal times, although it got too big here. It will, however, always be a huge factor in any economy.

I have been involved in construction all my life. I was a subcontractor for years and I was a main contractor for 15 years. I know both sides. I have not studied the Bill as much as I should have but I will. It is interesting and there is much in it.

The relationship between the main contractor and the subcontractor has always been poor; the subcontractor was always in a weak position. My own business has collapsed and I owe subcontractors money. I also owe the Revenue Commissioners money. I do not, however, owe money to some of the suppliers that people would think need protection. Some suppliers need protection but those who supply products that get lost in a project, such as concrete, are not necessarily those who most need protection. I do not owe money to Roadstone, Kilsaran or any concrete supplier, and that is the case for most developers who have gone broke. They are not the companies that got caught. It was the smaller suppliers who got caught, such as small hardware providers. Deputy McDonald spoke about the amount owed to subcontractors following the bust, and the figures are frightening. There was a knock-on effect and many small suppliers did not get their money because the subcontractors were not paid. There is a domino effect.

As a subcontractor, I worked for one of the biggest builders in the country in my early days. I did £170,000 worth of work for him, labour only, and he gave me £150,000. I told him he still owed me £20,000 and he told me to go to hell, that he had given me enough. I thought this was not fair so I went through the legal process to get my money and discovered after six months that the same builder had a good legal team in place to deal with subcontractors and that I was just one of many subcontractors who had been treated in this fashion. After six months my solicitor told me it would take two years to get my money through the courts and that I would probably be doing well to get two thirds of the amount I was owed. That was a very unsatisfactory arrangement. I managed to obtain some of the money owed to me by taking a more unorthodox route, but I will not discuss the details of that matter here. It is a very good story which I will recount to the Minister of State on another occasion.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.