Rebecca Moynihan (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Green Party for giving me the time to speak now because I must leave the Chamber afterwards. I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House, and as Senator Davitt mentioned, he probably spends as much time in the Chamber as many Senators. The Minister of State is probably the most responsive person in the Department to us, as he is with this important Bill.

Over the years we have heard of scandal after scandal affecting the building sector in this country, including mica, pyrite and fire control defects. We know building regulation has not been prioritised and the consequences continue to blight the lives of people in the State. That is why the Bill is welcome.

There is greater regulation supporting consumers going to the local shops than for citizens who are buying a home. That is of particular concern as a home is probably the biggest investment people will make. We have a voluntary system of regulation and it is proposed that this will be put on a statutory footing with the Construction Industry Federation. I have concerns about the CIF managing and maintaining the register because of the potential conflict of interest.Understanding that it is a trade union, or a form of a trade union, I still believe it is a concern that this will be the body maintaining this.

There are other aspects of the Bill that worry me. It appears that no obligation will be placed on the developer to use the services of a registered builder. It will be up to the developer to decide whether to do that. This may have implications for the developer in time, but there does not appear to be any requirement or obligation set down in the legislation for anybody to use those registered builders. That is particularly problematic when it comes to local authorities, for example. The Minister of State says that he wants compliance and to drive better standards, but it seems that elements of the legislation are toothless. There is a risk of big developers using builders who are not registered and who may not have the required compliance and qualifications. Significantly, if developers do not engage registered builders but continue to use the services of those who may not be on the register, that has implications for competition. We have seen time and again that a minority of bad builders and poor operators in the sector are not compliant even with things such as the sectoral employment order system set down for the construction sector to guarantee basic legal minimum standards of pay, terms and conditions. That allows them to low ball when they are making tenders and organise the lowest tenders for significant construction projects, undercutting the good operators in the system.

I also believe that strong consumer protection legislation would allow consumers to go after the developer where there are deficiencies in that regard. Where a developer fails to engage providers of building works who are on the register, there should be implications for that developer afterwards. The complaints procedure created in the Bill will allow a person to make a complaint to the registrar that the building provider is carrying out works while not registered or has not complied with the conditions of the registration. The registrar will then generally refer the complaint to the board of investigation unless it falls into a variety of exceptions. I refer to the question of privilege. All complaints made to the board, investigations and reports are absolutely privileged. That is fine. However, if a series of complaints is made against somebody and the person is a serial offender, that should not be subject to absolute privilege, particularly if the stated objective of the legislation is to protect consumers and to regulate the industry. We need to know, and should be able to know, who the rogue builders are and what sanctions have been applied to them. There have been too many problems with people who have been involved with defective buildings then going on to other projects and operating as if none of that ever happened because of the planning Act. The default position has to be that if there is information on serial offenders, it is provided to the public so they know and are fully briefed on who the rogue operators are.

Finally, there should be a statutory entitlement for the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, which has been so involved in campaigns relating to housing, to be represented on the board. The trade union movement has significant expertise in identifying issues in the sector that it represents. It is not just the CIF that has the experience and background in the building industry. ICTU and the trade unions involved from a workers' perspective should also be represented on the board.