Ivana Bacik (Independent)

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 debated my amendment No. 22. This is the way in which he said he would deal with issues around unsatisfactory completion of developments. I have no difficulty with the amendment but it is not enough to address the problems we sought to address with amendment No. 22 and with the equivalent Independent and Fine Gael amendments. While I support amendment No. 63, it is not an answer to the problems which have arisen where developments have not been satisfactorily completed.

Amendment agreed to.

Government amendment No. 63:

In page 17, subsection (4), lines 1 to 4, to delete paragraph (h) and substitute

the following:

"(h) determining whether the management structure of an owners' management company in a mixed use multi-unit development complies with the provisions of this Act, and if not the order may direct that such steps as the court considers necessary to ensure that the arrangements concerned do so comply, be taken;

(i) determining whether a proposal to materially alter the physical character of a development which is a mixed use multi-unit development would disproportionately or inequitably affect any class of unit owners;

(j) directing the developer of a multi-unit development to complete the multiunit development in accordance with—

(i) the terms of any contract,

(ii) the conditions of a relevant planning permission under the Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2009, or

(iii) the Building Control Acts 1990 and 2007;".

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 64 and 65 not moved.