Master Builders would like to see centralised regulatory regime for building supplies

Master Builders chief executive David Kelly says he is pleased that the Commerce Commission’s initial report on the cost of construction supplies has identified some critical issues.

Kelly would like to see the idea of a centralised regulatory regime adopted, instead of the dozens of various consenting authorities around New Zealand.

That could mean if a product gets approved in one jurisdiction it is approved everywhere.

“There are 60 nearly 70 councils around New Zealand and they’re all grappling with whether the new products meet the building code or not – from my perspective that’s hopeless really.”

Authoritative advice from the central regulator Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) was needed and the gib task force had shown it could be done, Kelly said.

There was only one building code but 70 councils had to interpret what it meant, he said.

MBIE could issue a guidance which councils generally pick up, or it could issue a directive that certain products must be accepted, he said.

“I think the guidance is often the easier way and a good way to go but MBIE has not been particularly active in that area over the last few years.”

It would be preferable for one body to issue guidance on products that covered the whole of New Zealand rather than each council having to work it out, he said.

Minister of Housing Megan Woods told Checkpoint the government wanted detailed work and recommendations from Commerce Commission and this preliminary report was a stepping stone.

The final report and conclusive recommendations are not due until December, with an official response from the minister not until next year.

The reported indicated that some work was already underway including providing guidance to building consent authorities on how to make product substitutions, Woods said.

Asked why MBIE could not list acceptable substitute products in other areas, Woods said if it made sense the government would look at doing that.

“I’m not ruling that out … I’m saying we’ve demonstrated that we can do it and I’m saying if it needs to be done in other products, certainly not ruling that out.”

It was necessary to ensure there were simplified processes so that building inspectors and people in the consent authorities needed to know how to do the variations, Woods said.

“We have to take the process that we’ve demonstrated has worked with plaster board and we have to do it product by product.”