Dear +Raymond Huo,
There is a high probability that the +Labour party will
be taking office at the next election. With the support of the
+Conservative party, +Greens party and the +Maori party.
As a building inspector with the +Auckland Council, I am fully aware of
the ramifications of the changes in the (Building amendment act of 2012) this
will of course be imposed on the licensed building practitioners. Maybe within
the next 18 months.
I would like to boldly offer you my ideas on how you can provide a
future.
This will be when you sit around the cabinet table and discuss policy
and how to lead the building and construction sector:
As I mentioned I am an
inspector and a qualified carpenter for 31 years.
I have sadly watched with dismay the
weakening of the industry by the application of :
+Adam Smith’s theory of
+Laissez-faire +economic model which includes the division of labour.
It is well documented that he did not have a
healthy respect for the Guilds. All which respected the role of the tradesman
and his craft. I acknowledge that the guild system had a monopoly over the
traditions and as such abused their control by manipulating the market price
and restricted access.
From my small world at Auckland
Council the opposite has now happened.
As each grassroots contractor
knows +Fletchers, +James Hardies, +Carters. Look after the shareholder return
first. There is a myriad of other material and major commercial construction
companies who ride on their coat tails. Their collective drive is orientated to
the betterment of the main manufacturers only.
The continual weakness of the
supposed representative associations only strengthens any
comprehensive challenge to the Government and local council changes.
At the moment the +Construction
Industry Council and their member organisations propose to be a representative
of and speak on behalf of the industry. http://www.nzcic.co.nz/
28 Inspections by building consent authorities
Section 90 is amended by repealing subsection (3) and substituting the following subsections:
“(3)In this section, inspection includes—
“(a)the taking of all reasonable steps to ensure that building work is being carried out in accordance with a building consent:
“(b)in the case of work carried out under a commercial building consent, the taking of all reasonable steps to determine whether the approved quality assurance system is being complied with.
“(4)Nothing in this section may be taken to impose an obligation on a building consent authority to make an inspection.”
Section 90 is amended by repealing subsection (3) and substituting the following subsections:
“(3)In this section, inspection includes—
“(a)the taking of all reasonable steps to ensure that building work is being carried out in accordance with a building consent:
“(b)in the case of work carried out under a commercial building consent, the taking of all reasonable steps to determine whether the approved quality assurance system is being complied with.
“(4)Nothing in this section may be taken to impose an obligation on a building consent authority to make an inspection.”
The builders are not ready for
this transition, how would I resolve this problem?
Firstly, the local building consent authorities should be
obligated/regulated to provide support technical support (as building industry
advisors) this role is transitional from where they are at today towards where they
should be technically in the future with
obviously a constraint on the b.ca and T/A to not charge for this service. {31/03/2011 speech +Maurice
Williamson}
I want to assure you that
the risk-based consenting system will be introduced only when we have confidence
in the quality of our building work. One of the pre-conditions includes
having a sound base of competent licensed building practitioners, who know how
to comply with the Building Code.
Secondly, this service needs to be funded via the +Building Research Levy. This means the +BRANZ funding mechanism its
purposes/existence needs to be adjusted.
1.
The minister in charge of the levy needs to
be changed to economic development or the building and construction sector
minister.
2.
No longer does, nor should the minister talk
with the MBA as in reality they represent a small proportion of the whole
industry. 12,900 members relative to upwards of 120,000
participants in the industry {+DBH 2009 Productivity report}
4 Minister may prescribe rates of levy
·
(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Minister may from time
to time, after consulting with the association and the New Zealand +Master Builders' Federation Incorporated
3.
The T/A, s should have no right to take a fee
from the transaction costs.
4.
The fee should be externally audited and
managed by each districts localised Licensed Building Practitioners. Each
district creating a “Building Industry Education Fund scholarship”.
5.
Each district employees the transitional
“Building Industry Advisors”.
6.
Each district contracts the appropriate ITO,s
for the trade training and the district will create K.P.I.s for the I.T.O s to
achieve.
7.
Each district has the right to hire and fire
the groupings of government departments and associations. Each department will have to meet K.P.I,s. If
they do not achieve it the district can employ outside organisations to resolve
the localised building industry problems we all have.
8.
We would develop a inspection online system
like +Telarc-SAi www.envirostep.co.nz to help educate and address compliance
issues.
9.
The software self-auditing program would be
jointly owned by government and LBP district areas. It would be used to
influence the insurance council’s investment. Income received would be returned
to the localised communities.
4 Minister may prescribe rates of levy
·
(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act, the +Minister may from time
to time, after consulting with the association and the New Zealand Master Builders' Federation Incorporated
The minister says that we as an industry have been the
poor cousin in the economic room. Please note
quotes from his speech to the Construction Clients Group: 28/03/2012
• But be assured, there is
no slowing down or direction change, this is about taking what has been a
poorer cousin of other parts of economic development and bringing it into the
main stream. This government sees the Building and Construction sector as a
vital cog in its economic growth agenda.
• And recognising that
there is no “one size fits all” for building work, risk-based consenting aligns
the amount of checking and inspection required by a building consent authority
with the complexity and risk of the work, and with the skills and capability of
the people carrying out that work.
Vision for the sector
• Productivity sounds as if
it’s all about profits and nothing else. Profitability is definitely an
important part of it, but there are also many social benefits which will flow
from lifting GDP by 2% and driving an additional $3 billion of economic
activity.
• For example, many of
those who work in the sector are often in the lower socio-economic group. By
driving up skills you drive up wages. By streamlining the construction
procurement pipeline you help mend the boom-bust cycle which currently plagues
the industry. Not only does this cycle send our skilled tradesmen overseas or
into other sectors, but during the bust stage it pushes many people back onto
the welfare spiral. This could be addressed by providing secure, attractive
career pathways
Whilst we
are on the subject of reform, I believe for the protection of homeowners and
the licensed building practitioners that every T/A should demand a personal guarantee
for products used on building sites. This is if the manufacturers who are
refusing to sign up to the criminally liable code mark material appraisal system,
but continue to go down the locally endorsed Branz system.
This is not
unduly a problem for the T/A, but it is an absolutely a huge problem for every
LBP in NZ who will need to insure against it.
Raymond, the vision of the minister is admirable. The
constraints on him and any future ministers is that the government has lost any
real controls over the industry.
My proposal for vision aligns our industry with helping mainland
+China in joint building industry education also the importation of quality
reasonably priced building materials.
China has a real need of educating un-skilled farm workers that move
from the country to the city.
With all our faults we also have some real potential
positive attributes. We can help.
The industry needs
to be profitable. The guys in the SME sector are not as yet able to develop due
to many issues. Some of them are a lack
of efficiency, productivity, low numeracy and the most obvious low
profitability.
The above locally owned business model takes back the
ownership of the build process to the +LBP and homeowner on site.
An additional component that you can align with is the
possible broader vision for us as a country.
Your alliance and endorsement of this vision has at its
core, a price reduction in the supply of
quality materials being introduced into the building supply chain. The undue influence by the main material
suppliers will stop. They will be required to support and address customer
first policies in their processes to win favour.
Currently their dominance creates intimidation on the
associations, government, local government, retail outlets. e.t.c Their power
is also felt in the media in print, television, online and the public relations
marketplace.
As has been evidenced by your peer +Clare Curran in
parliament before 05/04/2012. In relation to the undue pressure from +TVNZ
executive on the +Fair Go team.
I would plead with you to help see the woods for the
trees.
Have a broader
more progressive vision beyond your three year term. I would also ask you to consider the real
future the +Chinese, + Indian participants
have in our country. We need your contacts your relationships to help us
increase our competitiveness internationally.
I wish you the best of luck with the future and the next
election.
I would love to discuss this further if you were
inclined.
HEAR HEAR!!!
ReplyDelete