Fire-safety decisions explained by Minister

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32604, 12 May 1971, Page 18

Fire-safety decisions explained by Minister

Two major recommendations of the Hunn Committee’s report on fire safety had been rejected because the Government considered that by«laws could most effectively control fire-safety regulations, the Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr Seath) told delegates to the annual conference of the Institution of Fire Engineers in Christchurch yesterday.

“The committee recommended that the standards be laid down by regulations and not, as is now the case, in standard by-laws. We have looked into the practicability of statutory regulations very thoroughly, but have decided against it,** Mr Seath said.

Statutory regulations would give the Government responsibility for standards of Are safety in buildings. By-laws give local bodies the responsibility. Announcing the terms of reference for the inquiry in March. 1969. Mr Seath asked the committee to consider "the co-ordination that exists among licensing authorities, local authorities, and fire authorities in respect of fire safety in buildings used primarily as public accommodation houses or as homes for the physically handicapped, children, or the aged and the need for improvement in this area." The inquiry was called after seven persons died in a fire at Sprott House in Karori, Wellington, three years ago. REJECTION GROUNDS Rejection of the committee recommendation for coordination through statutory control was based "primarily on the ground that local circumstances can call for differing requirements and these can be met much more effectively under a by-law procedure than by regulation,” said Mr Seath. “A further factor is the frequent changes in tech-!

Iniques and methods used in I the building industry. Keeping regulations up to date iwith these changes would be j extremely cumbersome, and the whole procedure would be time consuming and tend to cause undue delay." The Hunn Committee also

recommended that if by-laws were to be superseded by regulations, the regulations should be accepted as binding by the Crown. 'The Crown cannot be bound by by-laws and, indeed, it cannot be bound by regulations unless the act specifically binds the Crown,” Mr Seath said. "However, the Fire Prevention Division of the Ministry

of Works applies high standards in its work, and generally speaking these standards are not less than those set out in Chapter V of the Model Building By-law. I think you can rest assured that the aim of the committee to ensure that the Crown applies standards at least equal to those to be applied by local authorities will be achieved."

CODE MANDATORY The Department of Internal Affairs had, however, accepted some of the major recommendations in the committee’s report. The code of fire protection would be mandatory and would be based on by-laws approved by the Minister of Internal Affairs (and not on statute as recommended by the committee). Every local authority would be required, under proposed amendments to the Municipal Corporations and Counties Acts this year, to have adequate fire safety by-laws by March 31, 1973, said the Minister. The Government agreed

with the Hunn Committee that there was a strong case for revision of the current model by-laws (model bylaws are suggested to local bodies by the Standards Association, but the local bodies are not obliged to adopt them). “The Standards Association has been requested to undertake this revision, and negotiations are taking place between the association and my departmental officers on ways and means of speeding this matter," Mr Seath said!

The committee also recommended that fire-safety inspectors be appointed to ensure that adequate standards of fire safety were maintained. Mr Seath said that this recommendation was being examined by the Fire Service Council and he expected to receive the council’s views fairly soon.