Mrs BRAHAM - 1994-08-24
As the minister is aware, a meeting was held recently in my electorate office of concerned members of the building industry. The meeting was invaluable in that it clarified many of the issues raised, but it was for those people present only. Will the minister notify the industry and the general public of the current requirements of the new Building Act, particularly provisions affecting buildings that are 20 to 30 years old? Will he also publicise the review that has been undertaken by his department.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, once again, I compliment the member for Braitling who raised this matter with me. I had hardly put my feet under the desk after the elections before she was into my office with a series of issues relating to certification. This has been a matter of some debate in the Alice Springs community since the introduction of the new system of private certification that was extensively debated in this House last year.
Before the amendments last year, basically all building inspection work was carried out by government building inspectors from the Department of Lands, Housing and Local Government, while certification of buildings in accordance with the Building Code was issued by the Department of Lands, Housing and Local Government. What we have done is to undertake a process of private certification whereby people in the private sector can be authorised and registered as building certifiers to carry out the process of certifying plans as being in accordance with the Building Code and completing the necessary inspections, including certifying that the works have been completed properly in accordance with the Building Code.
A consumer protection mechanism is built into that legislation. Without going into the detail, the form of that is the two-pool system. What that means is that if, within a period of 10 years, any structural faults are identified, the consumer takes action immediately through the pool A insurance to fix any structural defects forthwith, at no cost and with no litigation problems as far as the home owner is concerned. Previously, arguments and disputes continued over many years as to who was responsible for structural faults, but that has been clarified now. The pool A insurance will then take professional indemnity action against the certifier who is required to hold professional indemnity insurance. That places the pressure back on the certifier, and their insurance company has much greater financial capacity to press the issue of professional indemnity than any private home owner has.
Generally throughout the Territory, the system has worked exceptionally well. Significant cost savings result from the increased speed of approvals and certification, simply in terms of time and efficiency because there are many more certifiers in the community. Policing of adherence to the Building Code has increased markedly also. As I said, that system of private certification has been in operation for approximately 12 months. We have commenced a review of the operation of private certification. This review has consisted of distributing survey forms to the users of private certification services, including home owners, builders and consultants, and meetings have been and will continue to be held with other key groups
Page 74
involved in the building control process. As part of this review, and in response to specific issues raised in particular by the member for Braitling, a series of meetings were held in Alice Springs on 10 and 11 August this year. These meetings canvassed feedback from a wide range of groups, including real estate agents, the construction industry, architects and engineers.
I am pleased to report that the general consensus is that private certification has provided the benefits originally envisaged. The new system has been described as 'responsive, cost-effective and offering a wider range of building control services than previously existed'. However, some difficulties in obtaining occupancy certificates for older buildings have been identified. These problems have resulted from a combination of factors, including lack of documentation on buildings which may be up to 30 or more years old and the need to upgrade fire safety matters where regulations have changed over the years. Officers in my department will assist in the issue of certificates for buildings in this situation by negotiating with the parties involved. This will ensure that any requirements applied to the older buildings are appropriate in terms of standards in force at the time of construction whilst achieving an acceptable level of safety for the occupants. The review of private certification will continue over the next few months to identify any finetuning needed to ensure that the building control system remains responsive to industry and community needs.
In respect of the older buildings, the situation basically is that, if they were built in accordance with the code and did not shonk the system at the time when they were built and if they have been maintained reasonably, there will be no problem in obtaining appropriate certification. I know the member for Braitling has been approached about some public buildings. Obviously, we have a public interest to ensure that appropriate and adequate fire safety standards are enforced in those buildings. That will be negotiated, but we will exercise our responsibilities in the interests of public safety to ensure that safety standards in line with current fire safety provisions are maintained, particularly in public buildings.
Page 75
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, once again, I compliment the member for Braitling who raised this matter with me. I had hardly put my feet under the desk after the elections before she was into my office with a series of issues relating to certification. This has been a matter of some debate in the Alice Springs community since the introduction of the new system of private certification that was extensively debated in this House last year.
Before the amendments last year, basically all building inspection work was carried out by government building inspectors from the Department of Lands, Housing and Local Government, while certification of buildings in accordance with the Building Code was issued by the Department of Lands, Housing and Local Government. What we have done is to undertake a process of private certification whereby people in the private sector can be authorised and registered as building certifiers to carry out the process of certifying plans as being in accordance with the Building Code and completing the necessary inspections, including certifying that the works have been completed properly in accordance with the Building Code.
A consumer protection mechanism is built into that legislation. Without going into the detail, the form of that is the two-pool system. What that means is that if, within a period of 10 years, any structural faults are identified, the consumer takes action immediately through the pool A insurance to fix any structural defects forthwith, at no cost and with no litigation problems as far as the home owner is concerned. Previously, arguments and disputes continued over many years as to who was responsible for structural faults, but that has been clarified now. The pool A insurance will then take professional indemnity action against the certifier who is required to hold professional indemnity insurance. That places the pressure back on the certifier, and their insurance company has much greater financial capacity to press the issue of professional indemnity than any private home owner has.
Generally throughout the Territory, the system has worked exceptionally well. Significant cost savings result from the increased speed of approvals and certification, simply in terms of time and efficiency because there are many more certifiers in the community. Policing of adherence to the Building Code has increased markedly also. As I said, that system of private certification has been in operation for approximately 12 months. We have commenced a review of the operation of private certification. This review has consisted of distributing survey forms to the users of private certification services, including home owners, builders and consultants, and meetings have been and will continue to be held with other key groups
Page 74
involved in the building control process. As part of this review, and in response to specific issues raised in particular by the member for Braitling, a series of meetings were held in Alice Springs on 10 and 11 August this year. These meetings canvassed feedback from a wide range of groups, including real estate agents, the construction industry, architects and engineers.
I am pleased to report that the general consensus is that private certification has provided the benefits originally envisaged. The new system has been described as 'responsive, cost-effective and offering a wider range of building control services than previously existed'. However, some difficulties in obtaining occupancy certificates for older buildings have been identified. These problems have resulted from a combination of factors, including lack of documentation on buildings which may be up to 30 or more years old and the need to upgrade fire safety matters where regulations have changed over the years. Officers in my department will assist in the issue of certificates for buildings in this situation by negotiating with the parties involved. This will ensure that any requirements applied to the older buildings are appropriate in terms of standards in force at the time of construction whilst achieving an acceptable level of safety for the occupants. The review of private certification will continue over the next few months to identify any finetuning needed to ensure that the building control system remains responsive to industry and community needs.
In respect of the older buildings, the situation basically is that, if they were built in accordance with the code and did not shonk the system at the time when they were built and if they have been maintained reasonably, there will be no problem in obtaining appropriate certification. I know the member for Braitling has been approached about some public buildings. Obviously, we have a public interest to ensure that appropriate and adequate fire safety standards are enforced in those buildings. That will be negotiated, but we will exercise our responsibilities in the interests of public safety to ensure that safety standards in line with current fire safety provisions are maintained, particularly in public buildings.
Page 75
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016