This week, individual citizens and families in my constituency have become the latest innocent victims of being forced to face the fallout, living nightmare and financial upset of learning that their dream homes have been severely blighted by inept, incompetent, greed-driven building standards that were not properly regulated by the State. There is a duty on Government to protect its people against incompetent rogue cowboy builders. This duty extends to tidying up, once and for all, the mess and the shoddy workmanship that is allowed to go on unchecked and unregulated. Despite numerous reported debacles since Priory Hall, this Government has still not acted to secure a remedy for people whose homes have been proven to have been built in a defective way. Where is the remedy? What redress and tangible support do these hardworking people have when they discover major defects in their homes? In many cases, the builders and developers have gone bust. However, our forgiving corporate insolvency laws allow them to return to the workforce. They are given a second chance and a fresh start, but the individual citizens who do not enjoy the protection of the corporate veil are abandoned. There are still no adequate statutory remedy or supports in place for many people who find themselves in this situation. There is lots of talk but no concrete action for thousands of people who are enduring this living hell.

Will the Taoiseach undertake a review of the causes of housing failures that have come to light in recent years? Will he set out a strategy for dealing with housing defects to include statutory protection for home buyers supported by comprehensive mandatory defects insurance for all dwellings? Will he please explain to the House why the only law reform in this area introduced since Priory Hall is changes to building control, with zero new remedies for consumers, no regulatory body for contractors and no dispute resolution scheme for the people of this country when defects emerge in their homes?

I thank the Deputy for her question. We had this before with Priory Hall and Longboat Quay, and now we have it in this instance. The solution is one that was never implemented in the first place. When planning permissions are issued by local authorities for major developments such as these, it is very simple to have a clerk of works appointed to supervise the job and, where greed arises or contractors decide to cut corners, order them to take the development down and rebuild it properly. However, during the exceptional boom - when everybody assumed we would all be millionaires without having to do any work - corners were cut. In the cases of Longboat Quay and Priory Hall, greed was a central element which impacted on the lives of the people involved. The answer to this question is that when planning permissions are given, there must be an oversight authority to see that the building is in accordance with the planning conditions issued. I cannot say to the Deputy that there are not other Priory Halls, Longboat Quays or other instances of what she has pointed out. It is not just about building regulations. They are important, and building standards are critical, but it is also about supervising the developments. If one grants permission for X number of developments and there is nobody to supervise what happens, one must be able to take the risk that the standard should be as one would expect, which is not what has happened in the case to which the Deputy refers.

This issue and what should be done about it are a focus of the Minister for housing. In my view, where this has happened over the years, be it in individual cases, group apartments or major developments, the supervisory authority needs to be appointed either independently or by the local authority which grants the planning applications in the first instance. I have had numerous experiences over the years of cases in which contractors did have to obey the law and the rules and where those who did not were punished for not doing so. This is not an easy situation for the tenants in these apartments. They paid big money for the dream homes, as the Deputy says, to which they aspire. We had the same situation with pyrite on so many occasions. I cannot say to her that this has not happened elsewhere. From speaking to the families of those who lost children and young students in the Berkeley balcony collapse, I know that the position is the same in other countries where corners were cut and standards not realised.

This is an issue that requires a response and the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government has already set out these standards. It is a case of implementing and supervising them in all developments. I cannot tell the Deputy this is the last case in the country.

While I appreciate the Taoiseach's recognition that we need a supervisory authority, the fact is local authority building control is greatly underfunded. In many cases claims against builders are statute barred because defects were not noticed by home owners in the legally stipulated period and there are still no solutions for people whose homes were built pre-2014.

The huge legislative gap which exists in this area more than five years after Priory Hall is staggering. How many times must this issue rear its ugly head before the people who are affected by it have some level of certainty about the relief they can seek? Are they forever to be reliant on a Government which acts in an ad hoc wait-to-see manner? These are people's homes and it should be a `Government priority that if anything happens to people’s homes, they should not be left in limbo. The Government’s housing plan is called Rebuilding Ireland. Let us make sure we do it right this time. The Taoiseach should initiate a review of previous housing failures and ensure home owners have somewhere to turn for relief from the mistakes of developers.

The Deputy will recall that we had question after question in this Chamber for a long period about Priory Hall, with court cases and one thing and another. This was eventually sorted when the Government took action with the other agencies, the same as applied in respect of the defects in Longboat Quay and others. Obviously, things have changed and engineers are required to sign off on certificates of standards, whether on small issues or major developments.

The Deputy makes the point that home owners did not notice the defects. How could they? Many home owners would not have any practical experience of building standards or of how buildings are constructed. Where rogue contractors, either through greed or taking short cuts, put defective buildings together, or fire traps as was the case in Priory Hall, they are guilty of a grossly serious offence. In my view they should never be allowed to build again, or not for a very long time. Their certificates of competency should be withdrawn. We need a supervisory independent clerk of works or authority to say that is not what they got permission for, that is not the standard, and they must take it down and rebuild it. If they find that somebody signs off on a certificate saying it is of quality that it is not, that person should pay the penalty as well.