Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:

"notes that:— in light of the tragic events in the Grenfell Tower fire London, all local authorities have been requested, as a matter of urgency, to review their multi-storey social housing units to ensure that all early warning systems, including alarm and detection systems, and means of escape including corridors, stairways and emergency exits, are fully functional and in place; and

— immediate action has been taken to alert the building industry, landlords and homeowners to remain vigilant in relation to fire and life safety in buildings for which they are responsible;acknowledges the many incidences of building failures and non-compliance concerns that have come to light over the past decade, and the associated significant economic and personal consequences of such situations;

further notes that building defects are matters for resolution between the contracting parties involved, including the homeowner, the builder, the developer and/or their respective insurers, structural guarantee or warranty scheme;

recognises:— the important role of the State in maintaining an effective regulatory framework for building standards and the extensive statutory powers of enforcement that local building control authorities have, pursuant to the Building Control Act 1990, both during construction and during the five years following completion of building works, where issues of non-compliance with building regulations arise; and

— the powers that local authorities have pursuant to the Fires Services Acts 1981 and 2003, which have been effectively invoked in recent years in a number of cases where concerns have arisen regarding fire safety in a building;welcomes the responding initiatives that have been introduced as part of a broad-ranging building control reform agenda, which have brought a new order and discipline to bear on construction projects and have created a culture of compliance with building regulations,

including:— the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (S.I. No. 9 of 2014) and accompanying Code of Practice for Inspecting and Certifying Buildings and Works, empowering competence and professionalism in the design, construction, inspection and certification of building works through statutory certificates;

— the new Building Control Management System, which facilitates the electronic administration of building control functions and provides a common platform for clear and consistent administration of building control matters, and which is subject to ongoing improvement to achieve further efficiencies;

— the new Framework for Building Control Authorities, which standardises work practices, systems, procedures and decision-making in relation to oversight of building control activity across the sector, to enhance consistency of approach nationally, and to move towards a risk-based approach to inspections by building control authorities;

— the development of training programmes for building control officers;

— the significant changes and clarification in legislation for construction products on foot of the European Union Construction Products Regulation (No. 305/2011); and

— recent developments in the construction insurance market, including the introduction of products which offer first-party insurance cover, for damage and non-damage related claims; and requests that continuing priority is attached to the completion of further important steps as part of the building control reform agenda, particularly:— building on the preparatory work undertaken as part of the local government reform programme, the creation of a centralised structure for the governance and oversight of the building control functions of local authorities, through a shared service in a lead local authority;

— the completion of an evaluation of the adequacy of building control resources at local level. A 12 month study of local building control activity commenced in quarter two of 2017 and it is anticipated that a sufficient level of data will be received to commence analysis in quarter four of 2017, this will inform the evaluation of the adequacy of resources;

— the drafting and enactment of legislation in relation to the registration of building contractors, following on from the recent publication of the General Scheme of the Building Control (Construction Industry Register Ireland) Bill 2017; and

— the ongoing review and updating of the building regulations in light of technical innovation and international best practice in the construction sector, in particular, a new volume of Technical Guidance Document B (TGD B) in respect of dwelling houses will come into effect on 1st July, 2017, and work is ongoing in relation to a second volume of TGD B in respect of buildings other than dwelling houses."

I wish to thank the Deputies for the motion proposed this evening. It addresses an area of fundamental concern, one that has a direct impact on the daily life of every individual living in the State.

I would like to place on the record of the House our sympathies to all of those who have been so tragically affected by the devastating fire which took place in Grenfell Tower in London last week. The fire has brought into sharp focus the paramount importance not just of appropriate fire safety measures, but also the importance of appropriate and robust building standards.

As Minister with responsibility for both, one of my first priorities upon taking up my new role was to take immediate action to ensure life safety for all citizens living in flats and apartments here in Ireland. On Friday I met with Dublin’s chief fire officer to discuss fire safety and life safety issues in light of the London tragedy. I requested that the management board of the National Directorate for Fire and Emergency Management convene and assess the readiness of the fire authorities to respond to such emergencies. They have since reported back positively that we can have confidence regarding the capability of fire services to respond to emergencies in this State. I have requested that each local authority, as a matter of urgency, review its multi-storey social housing units to ensure that all early warning systems, including alarm and detection systems, and means of escape, including corridors, stairways and emergency exits, are fully functional and in place. I have also requested that the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, issue a notification to remind all landlords of their responsibilities and obligations in this regard. Furthermore, I have been assured that the RTB is co-ordinating with local authority fire departments, and the National Directorate for Fire and Emergency Management, to provide detailed information directly and individually to all landlords in the coming days. The RTB has also placed notices to this effect on its website and in the press. In order to remind builders, assigned certifiers, designers and owners of their obligations in relation to compliance with the building regulations, I have requested that a notification be issued to all registered building control management system users. There are approximately 57,000 registered on that system. This process commenced late last week and has now been completed. I will continue to keep all of these matters under review as we move to a follow-up phase of work in the coming weeks.

While I am sure many of the Deputies in this House can agree with the sentiments of the motion proposed, it fails completely to recognise the significant progress which has been made over recent years in reforming the building control system. For this reason I have tabled a counter motion. It is one thing to say "do more" or "do differently" – that we can debate, but it is another thing to say that we have done nothing when that is not the case. This is an important debate but I would urge Deputies contributing to it to avoid certain rhetoric that flies in the face of the facts here in Ireland, and I would remind them of their duty of care in this regard - not to unnecessarily spread fear where it may not be necessary to be fearful.

Unfortunately, we are all too well aware of the many incidences of building failures or severe non-compliance concerns that have come to light over the past decade. They exist in my own constituency, as I know they do in Deputy Martin's constituency. The economic and personal consequences of these situations have been very significant and they are deeply distressing for the individuals involved.

A reform programme has been advanced by my Department to strengthen the system by improving compliance with, and oversight of, the requirements of the building regulations. It was through the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014, commonly known as BCARS, that key deficits in the regulatory regime were addressed. These regulations brought a new degree of competence and professionalism to construction projects, and established a chain of responsibility that begins with the owner. Since 2014, the owner must assign competent persons to design, build, inspect and certify building works that he or she has commissioned. They, in turn, must account for their contribution through the lodgement of compliance documentation, inspection plans and statutory certificates. The statutory certificate of compliance on completion signed by both a registered construction professional and the builder must be in place prior to occupation. Given the significant financial and professional implications attaching to signature of a statutory certificate of compliance on completion, there was considerable industry resistance to these reforms when they were first proposed, but they were introduced and three years on, they have brought a new order to bear on construction projects.

I have often heard the current system of building control described as self-certification and I believe that this is a misnomer. Prior to the 2014 reforms a builder was required to obtain only an opinion of compliance with building regulations. However, the new regulations since 2014 now require the owner to assign a competent person to act as an assigned certifier in relation to individual projects. This person must develop an inspection plan and ensure physical inspections of the building works are carried out at key stages to satisfy themselves that the works are in compliance with the building regulations. The assigned certifier must be a registered construction professional, that is, an architect, a chartered engineer or a building surveyor. They must demonstrate the basis for the certification of compliance with the building regulations through the lodgement of compliance documentation, inspection plans and statutory certificates with the local building control authority, and this is done through the centralised building control management system. This is far more than obtaining an opinion of compliance, which was the previous practice.

The Government largely agrees with the sentiment of the motion tabled that proposes a national office to improve the effectiveness of the oversight and governance of the building control system. The national building control management system has been put in place to facilitate the electronic administration of building control functions and provides a common platform for clear and consistent administration of building control matters across the local authority sector. A BCMS module is currently being developed to collect data at commencement about construction works. This will position building control authorities to carry out the risk-based targeted inspections that the Deputy spoke of, delivering more efficient and effective use of available resources. In regard to the building control management project, a centralised structure for the governance and oversight of building control has been developed as a shared service, and will be embedded in a lead local authority. A competitive process to select the lead authority for this is about to commence. This will facilitate increased risk-based inspection activity, improving consistency and promoting a culture of compliance in the building sector with a single unified national approach. This approach effectively draws on the wealth of experience that has been accumulated by local building control authorities, achieving progress more rapidly than would be the case with the establishment of a whole new separate regulatory entity. We do not need a new quango to do this work; we can use shared IT services, the new building control management system and designate a lead local authority to achieve what the Deputy wants to achieve in her motion.

The Government also very much agrees with the sentiment of the motion tabled that proposes a national building regulation office to regulate those involved in construction. However, it must be recognised that the Building Control Act 2007 established a statutory system of registration for architects and surveyors and as recently as the end of last month the Government approved the general scheme of the building control (construction industry register) Bill to establish a mandatory statutory register for builders and specialist subcontractors. This is an essential consumer protection measure which will give consumers who engage a registered builder the assurance that they are dealing with a competent and compliant operator. It will also provide a forum for the investigation of complaints against registered members and the imposition of proportionate sanctions. Public tolerance for incompetent workmanship has been well and truly exhausted and the construction industry register will complement the reforms already in place and those that are planned.

Much improvement has taken place but there is no room for complacency. We need to ensure on an ongoing basis that the system provides the best possible protections for our people. The Japanese use a word "kaizen" which means continuous improvement. We must have this concept at the heart of what we do in terms of building standards. The performance of our buildings is contingent on a strong and evolving building code in support of quality, safe construction and sustainable development. There has been much debate in the media in regard to cladding in light of the tragic fire in London, and the public have very justifiable concerns in this regard. Building regulations set out the requirements for fire safety and the use of proper products and materials, among other issues.

While it has yet to be definitively confirmed what type of cladding was used in the renovation of Grenfell Tower, the United Kingdom Department of Communities and Local Government has confirmed that cladding using a composite aluminium panel with a polyethylene core would be non-compliant with current building regulations guidance as this material should not be used as cladding on buildings over 18 m in height. I can confirm that the same restrictions apply under Irish building regulations.

In the interests of supporting owners and residents living in developments where concerns regarding non-compliance with fire safety requirements arise, a review was undertaken by an independent fire safety expert to develop a framework for general application in such situations. The report is currently under consideration – it was received by my Department in May – and subject to clarification on a number of issues, it is intended that the arrangements necessary for publication will be made at the earliest opportunity.

In general, building defects are matters for resolution between the contracting parties involved: the homeowner, the builder, the developer and/or their respective insurers, structural guarantee or warranty scheme. In this regard, it is incumbent on the parties responsible for poor workmanship and-or the supply of defective materials to accept their responsibilities and take appropriate action to provide remedies for affected homeowners. It is not possible for the State to take on responsibility or liability for all legacy issues of defective building materials or workmanship. More than that though, it would not send the right message to the industry regarding their responsibility for compliance and it might lead to unnecessary risk taking given the financial liability for any failures would be borne by the taxpayer. Why remove this responsibility from builders and put it on taxpayers when builders have a responsibility and a liability which can be effectively policed and controlled?

The failures in construction of the past have arisen largely due to inadequate design, poor workmanship or the use of improper products or a combination of these factors. The significant reforms that I have described this evening are aimed squarely at addressing all three of these issues. While, as I indicated earlier, I can subscribe to the sentiments underlying the motion that has been tabled this evening by the Green Party, I believe that the Government’s counter-motion provides a fuller reflection of the reforms that have taken place, those that are in train, and the programme of actions initiated specifically in response to last weeks’ most tragic events in London.

I therefore commend the Government’s amending motion to the House.

See this speech in context