Minister for Building and Construction, Chris Penk’s announcement proposing major reform of the building consents system is a welcome development and one that is long overdue. 

As architects, we stand between building consent authorities (councils) and clients. When we submit projects, they are heavily scrutinised by consent authorities as part of their risk mitigation strategy, due to the joint and several liability rules. I understand that authorities are trying to manage risk by way of this expensive and time-consuming assessment and inspection processes, but it inhibits productivity, innovation and adds to already high construction costs.  

It doesn’t happen this way in the United Kingdom or Australia, where joint and several liability is replaced by private insurance to pay the costs of remediation when things go wrong. A change here that meant that those undertaking construction projects either privately or commercially are required to manage the risk themselves by way of insurance will shorten the time consents take, minimise frustration around time and costs for architects and clients, and leave us to get on with our jobs. It will change the game entirely and money will be available to remedy defects on the small number of projects that go wrong in some way. 

HOBANZ is always advocating about leaky homes and current remediation projects. That has its place, but a construction sector in which nothing ever goes wrong is simply unrealistic. 

It is important to acknowledge that while most buildings perform as intended, there will always be an occasional project where this is not the case, and we need steps in place to deal with it in a way that does not penalise all  ratepayers through joint and several liability. 

The construction sector has come a long way and I agree with Master Builders’ David Kelly, who has put forward a case for less consenting of simple residential work on the basis of a lift in “sector capability”. In the last 20 years, I’ve seen a significant lift of skills in the construction sector. There’s been a rise in quality construction on sites around the country, and I see builders focussed on quality and a good job.  

It’s time for the industry to step up and take more responsibility and save homeowners from their rates being spent to mop up mistakes. As the Herald reported in August, “Auckland Council has forked out more than $300 million in confidential financial payouts to settle legal disputes” in the past five years. I don’t think the average ratepayer understands the cost to them; the huge amount of money being paid out from their rates to settle building contract disputes.  

On an ambitious note, amalgamating the 67 Building Consent Authorities (BCA) will also make a positive difference in our industry. Minister Penk is considering three options: Voluntary consolidation by councils; the creation of regional BCAs; or a single point of contact. Penk said this approach would focus on improving consistency and forming entities with a critical mass. There’s no doubt that once the Government pushes ahead, there will be a turf war about the consenting authorities consolidating, but one consent portal would be fantastic for New Zealand — and for architects who must juggle different systems, portals and passwords constantly.

Peter Townsend is Auckland Branch Chair of Te Kāhui Whaihanga New Zealand Institute of Architects. 

Photo: Cetteup, via Unsplash.