Builders seek curb on permits

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32861, 9 March 1972, Page 10

Builders seek curb on permits

Three remits designed to improve the standard of building in New Zealand and prevent jerrybuilding were passed after considerable discussion and some opposition at the annual conference of the New Zealand Master Builders’ Federation in Christchurch yesterday.

The first remit seeks to restrict to registered master builders the issue of any building permit for a building estimated to cost more than $lOOO. The conference decided that the Municipal Association and the Counties Association be approached with a view to legislation being drafted to make the restriction a statutory regulation. The Tauranga Builders’ Association, moving the remit, said that the time was well past when the building industry and the consumers needed protection. Other trades in the industry, such as architects, engineers, plumbers, drainlayers, and electricians, were all covered by registration. “Under the present law, any person, whether experienced in building in any way, or having done no building at all, can collect a building permit and begin construction of a building. This creates problems with the construction industry and the , work load

on building inspectors is increased.”

An Otago delegate, Mr J. G. Aiderton, said that such legislation would take away the right of every home owner to build his own home. Mr B. S. Blackie (Tauranga), who seconded the motion, said he was doubtful about the restriction on $lOOO buildings. A figure of $lO,OOO might be better. It was time there was some form of registration in the industry. The conference later passed

a Wellington and Hutt Valley remit that the federation consider the issue of certificates to retiring members certifying that they had been members of a master builders’ association for a stipulated period. Speakers for the remit said it would safeguard the value of the registration scheme. Retired members and members who had been expelled, or asked to leave associations, retained their registration certificates and some still practised building—including some who had been expelled. The public were misled when they saw a master builders* registration certificate on the wall of an office when the man who held it had been expelled, they said. An objector to the remit said that a “retired” certificate could be mistaken for a “practising” one. Supporters said that only 50 per cent of

registration certificates were recovered from retired or expelled members. Registration proposal The final remit of the conference, from the Auckland delegation, urged that the new management council consider a new registration scheme for builders within the industry. It was said that the Government in New South Wales now controlled registration of building industry and that the New Zealand federation, unless it did something “to set its own

house in order,” might become "Government-domi-nated.”

The remit asked that the management council co-opt Mr R. E. Webby, a former president, who had submitted a registration scheme to a previous conference. Mr Webby said that his registration scheme was,

basically, "registration by legislation.” He said that the federation would never get a registration scheme accepted by the Government while it was a scheme drawn up by the builders and for the builders. It had to be shown that a registration scheme was in the interests of the public. The federation could form the basis of such a scheme and present it to the Government as a method of protecting the public and therefore in the public interest. Earlier moves It was pointed out that the need for a statutory registration scheme had been mentioned in the presidential address given at the Christchurch conference in 1951. Another delegate said that the need had been discussed in 1901.

Mr H. J. Hulse, who moved the remit, after some objections had been heard, reiterated that the federation would not get a Governmentapproved registration scheme until it had its own house in order. A start must be made, even if the management council found it necessary to report back to the next annual conference, to be held in Auckland. The remit was carried without dissent.