Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. I thank Sinn Féin for tabling the motion and I acknowledge the number of people who travelled from Donegal, Mayo and Clare to be here today to voice their opinions. The biggest issue in all of what we are discussing is what went wrong. It is my view that the key issue is the lack of independent building control. Building control is under the remit of our local authorities but local authorities do not have the resources to deal effectively with building control. There is still an over-reliance on self-certification. We need a new model for building control. This makes sense when we see what it costs us to put right the wrongs of the past. We also see how unsuspecting families bought their homes in good faith and took out mortgages but have been left with a structurally defective home or a home that is not fit for habitation. They are paying a mortgage for a structurally defective home.

Another issue that comes to mind is the issue of mortgage protection and the insistence by the banks and mortgage providers that homeowners have structural defect insurance. This is a very pertinent issue to raise this evening. Where is the protection against structural defects in a new house where people have paid money for insurance? It was a prerequisite to getting a loan. It is still in place. Even in the Rebuilding Ireland home loan scheme, people still need to have a structural guarantee on the building. I have not heard much about this in the debate. If mortgage holders are paying for an insurance policy, it should be fit for purpose. It is very important that we get this sorted out as soon as possible, rather than people believing they have something that is of no use to them when they seek to get some protection from it. Since 2013, we have had the construction products regulation. Who monitors this, who controls it and who makes sure that what it says on the tin is activated and carried out properly?

We have just spoken about the situation with mica. There is also pyrite and issues with apartment blocks throughout the country and in the city which are defective and have to be put right. If we are to do anything on this it would be important for the Government, with our support, to bring forward and invest in a proper building control policy and to make sure every local authority has the necessary resources, not just tokenism and visiting 10% of properties being built. We must give building control to people who can control it independently. The resources put in place would reap dividends for the taxpayer for years to come.

It is very important that we do not continue in the same way. We have to learn from the past and we have to learn from the costs. This particular issue will cost a hell of lot of money and we should learn from this mistake. It is high time we took it by the scruff of the neck and invested money in building control. It is not spending money but investing money. If we do this, we will reap the rewards. We have self-regulation and everybody is providing a certificate but when that certificate is tested, it is found that nobody can stand behind it. This is the important issue. Whether someone is an architect, an engineer or a building control officer, it is very important that whatever is certified stands the test legally. The only way to do this is to have it done independently by local authorities.

See this speech in context