Results 10,281-10,300 of 11,444 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 61: In page 16, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following subsection: "(11) House rules shall have due regard to environmental considerations and in particular may not prohibit air drying of laundry.". The amendment addresses a bugbear for any of us who has lived in an apartment. There is a right to dry campaign that points out the environmental and personal hygiene...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: -----who consider the hanging of one's smalls on balconies or from windows to be unsightly. This is perhaps a rather contentious point but it should be considered, given the imperative to try to reduce carbon emissions. Tumble drying is one of the most energy intensive household tasks but it can be the only alternative in drying one's clothes if one is living in a confined space. One...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to Senators Quinn and Coffey for their support for the amendment. I was being somewhat flippant earlier but I want to make one further important point. Inserting a provision such as this in the Bill would not only send an important signal in terms of environmental considerations but it would also force a change in apartment design. Senator Coffey asked if there were ways to...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Washing my dirty linen in public.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am trying to think of another dreadful pun to wrap up the debate on the amendment. I note what the Minister and Senator McDonald said about restrictive covenants. The amendment could be seen as having a less broad effect and aims to ensure that where a lease is silent on this issue and there is no restrictive covenant contained in it, the house rules could not then prohibiting air drying....

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I wish to move amendment No. 64. I am grateful the Minister has indicated he will accept it. It is a technical-----

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thought the Minister said he would accept amendment No. 64 but not amendment No. 65.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I see that. I am grateful to the Minister for incorporating amendment No. 64 into amendment No. 63. The Minister said he would not accept amendment No. 65 which was a technical amendment to include requirements under the Building Control Acts as well as the Planning and Development Acts in section 18. I already mentioned the Minister's amendment No. 63 and he also referred to it when we...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 66: In page 17, subsection (4), between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following: "(j) annulling house rules or any provision thereof if such rules interfere unreasonably with the rights of an owner of a unit.". This amendment would provide for some appeal mechanism if rules are adopted which are over-zealous. The amendment proposes to insert a new subsection () under...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: In light of what the Minister said, I will not press the amendment. However, I am glad he said he will look at this. He can see the mischief with which I am trying to deal. I accept his point that it could give rise to friction but it could also be seen as a way to try to deal with friction where a group of unit owners ganged up on another owner and introduced a rule which interfered...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I support the amendment, as its insertion would simplify arrears recovery, speed up the process and save management companies considerable costs associated with pursuing arrears. It is a sensible suggestion which I hope the Minister will accept.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: It is sensible that the court should be able to refer a case for mediation on its own motion. What model is being used for the dispute resolution mechanism in section 21? Is it modelled on personal injuries legislation? Is it sufficiently tailored to disputes about completion which may require the resolution of technical issues by an engineer or architect mediator or conciliator? Does the...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I need to look at this issue in greater detail. It is a concern that was raised with me by the architects institute. I agree with the Minister that the objective should be to move to some type of alternative dispute mechanism rather than going to court. That objective is entirely positive and I agree that mediation conferences are infinitely preferable. The chair of the mediation...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I will reserve my right to introduce an amendment, if necessary, on Report Stage. I support the principle behind the section to move to alternative dispute resolution. Question put and agreed to. Sections 23 and 24 agreed to. SECTION 25.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I support Government amendment No. 74. However, I have one query for the Minister on it. Item No. 3 of Schedule 3 requires that the safety file be transferred. Is that sufficiently specific? A fire safety file requires the production of all relevant documents that might be required to facilitate the owners and management company in meeting their statutory obligations under fire safety...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 72: In page 21, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: "1. Sections 2 to 4 (obligation to have owners' management company).". This amendment seeks to ensure that a two, three or four unit development would still have a management company, otherwise it was thought the existing paragraphs of the Schedule would have made little sense. I am not sure if that is...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I will not press the amendment at this stage. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Schedule 1 agreed to. NEW SCHEDULE. Government amendment No. 73: In page 21, after line 14, to insert the following: 1. Section 4 - (Obligation of developer to transfer ownership of common areas of completed developments to owners' management company). 2. Section 5 - (Obligations to complete development to remain...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: The Minister has kindly indicated he will consider quite a number of provisions in the Bill between now and Report Stage. Given that Senator Quinn and I have said we would like to see changes made on Report Stage rather than in the Dáil, on the basis of the full debate we have had today, does the proposed date give sufficient time for consideration? I am not opposing Senator O'Donovan's...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Acting Chairman.