Mr WOOD - 2004-02-19
The building advisory services have tried to adopt a number of new policies relating to Certificate of Occupancy starting on 1 January this year. The department will not issue any Certificates of Occupancy for any building works built before June 1984. For building works between 1984 and 1993, they will give consideration to issuing a Certificate of Occupancy only if accompanied by a current builder’s certified report and a registered structural engineer’s unqualified certification.
As the NT Division of Engineers say they cannot issue an unqualified certification, could you please tell the House why these policies are being introduced? If the building advisory services discussed this with anyone, such as the engineers, before they released this policy, were you, as minister, informed of this policy before it was introduced? What, as minister, are you doing to allay the fears of many householders and businesses who may, under this policy, never be able to get a certificate of occupancy without partially demolishing their homes and businesses and paying out large sums of money to do so?
Madam SPEAKER: I have to admit sometimes your questions are a bit lengthy, member for Nelson.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his question. It is an important question because there has been some comment in the media about it,. and I do not believe some of that comment has been particularly well-informed.
The first thing to say is that there has been no policy adopted in relation to this matter. A proposal was put to me by the Building Services Branch to make some changes to the issuing of Certificates of Occupancy. I felt that it is an important issue and that there needed to be more consultation and discussion with major groups involved. I have subsequently met with quite a number of the major industry groups that are involved in this. There is a meeting set down for later this month, 23 February, which I will be attending. I am very interested in this issue.
On the issue the member for Nelson has raised, the proposed changes coame about because of a legal action that has occurred around one particular Certificate of Occupancy, which has raised a number of questions about the issuing of Certificates of Occupancy. The member for Nelson is incorrect in saying that certificates cannot be issued at the present time. Certificates can be issued on an Engineer’s Certificate, but the engineers are pointing out, subject to this particular court case that, in the case of some buildings and works that they have to inspect, it is very difficult for them to issue a report on that. So, these are the issues that have to be worked through.
Certificates of Occupancy are in more demand within the real estate market as buyers request them. There is probably some misguided faith put in Certificates of Occupancy because they give no indication at all about the current state of a building. What they do is certify that that building was built according to the Code at the time that the building was built. A Certificate of Occupancy is not required legally for the sale of a house, nor is it required for insurance purposes.
There is an issue there. I want to work through it. I am engaging with the major players in industry, and I am quite prepared to keep the member for Nelson briefed on this very important issue.
As the NT Division of Engineers say they cannot issue an unqualified certification, could you please tell the House why these policies are being introduced? If the building advisory services discussed this with anyone, such as the engineers, before they released this policy, were you, as minister, informed of this policy before it was introduced? What, as minister, are you doing to allay the fears of many householders and businesses who may, under this policy, never be able to get a certificate of occupancy without partially demolishing their homes and businesses and paying out large sums of money to do so?
Madam SPEAKER: I have to admit sometimes your questions are a bit lengthy, member for Nelson.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his question. It is an important question because there has been some comment in the media about it,. and I do not believe some of that comment has been particularly well-informed.
The first thing to say is that there has been no policy adopted in relation to this matter. A proposal was put to me by the Building Services Branch to make some changes to the issuing of Certificates of Occupancy. I felt that it is an important issue and that there needed to be more consultation and discussion with major groups involved. I have subsequently met with quite a number of the major industry groups that are involved in this. There is a meeting set down for later this month, 23 February, which I will be attending. I am very interested in this issue.
On the issue the member for Nelson has raised, the proposed changes coame about because of a legal action that has occurred around one particular Certificate of Occupancy, which has raised a number of questions about the issuing of Certificates of Occupancy. The member for Nelson is incorrect in saying that certificates cannot be issued at the present time. Certificates can be issued on an Engineer’s Certificate, but the engineers are pointing out, subject to this particular court case that, in the case of some buildings and works that they have to inspect, it is very difficult for them to issue a report on that. So, these are the issues that have to be worked through.
Certificates of Occupancy are in more demand within the real estate market as buyers request them. There is probably some misguided faith put in Certificates of Occupancy because they give no indication at all about the current state of a building. What they do is certify that that building was built according to the Code at the time that the building was built. A Certificate of Occupancy is not required legally for the sale of a house, nor is it required for insurance purposes.
There is an issue there. I want to work through it. I am engaging with the major players in industry, and I am quite prepared to keep the member for Nelson briefed on this very important issue.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016