STANDARDISATION

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXI, 11 September 1937, Page 9

STANDARDISATION

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIES POSSIBLE LOCAL BODIES PURCHASE AND BUILDING BY-LAWS CONFERENCE AT WELLINGTON [By Telegraph—Special to “The Mail”] WELLINGTON, This Day. “I have no doubt that hundreds of thousands of pounds a year could be saved if the principles of standardisation could be applied to our local body purchases and to our building by-laws,” said the Minister of Industries and Commerce, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, at a conference in Wellington of the New Zealand Standards Institute. “I have no desire to indulge in exaggeration, but experiences abroad support my belief that very substantial economies could be effected if the principle of standardisation were applied to the whole of New Zealand's trade and industry.” The Minister said that Sir George Julius, chairman of the Scientific and Industrial Research Council of Australia, had mentioned to him in a conversation that he considered it impossible for the industrial life of New Zealand to be placed on an adequately sound foundation unless a beginning were made by placing the organisation of standards in the forefront of activity. Noting that the conference was attended by Mr Jordan, the president of the Municipal Association, the city engineers in the four main cities, ar|:l representatives of the Departments of Public Works, Housing Construction, Education, and State Advances, Mr Sullivan said the success of the standards organisation with some 53 committees at work had been simply phenomenal. He felt certain that they would all appreciate the work that had been done. “There is no reason,” continued Mr Sullivan, "why sewer pipes should not be ordered on a basis of a uniform set of sizes and specifications for the whole Dominion. The same applies to sanitary and drainage equipment and water fittings to name but a few classes of the multiplicity of requirements in our public and private services. Further, there is no good reason why the quantities and classes of timber or other materials used in building construction should vary as they do.from province to province and from town to town. If 10 per cent or 20 per cent, more timber is used in our buildings in Wellington than is used in Auckland or any other city either the building requirements in the one place are inadequate or the extra material used in the other represents an economic waste which cannot be justified.” APPLICATION OF STANDARDS The Minister expressed the opinion that the application of standards to local body requirements would result in a very considerable reduction in the cost of house construction. The question was one that had received much attention in 32 other countries, many of which had undertaken extensive standardisation, and some of the results that had been placed before him were very striking in respect of the great saving that had been achieveu. Mr Sullivan quoted a report of an English committee showing that standardisation had not only effected economies but had resulted in increased efficiency; also that it had not been adequately realised how far success in international competition depended on a steady and well-organised home market. This was important to the consideration of industrial development, which was receiving the close attention of the New Zealand Government in the interests of producing a better balanced economy. It was obvious that if local body requirements /were standardised so that the same equipment would be used by local bodies and public authorities generally within practical limits the manufacture of that equipment within the Dominion would be greatly facilitated at a price more advantageous to the purchaser and more satisfactory to the suppliers. BUILDING BY-LAWS

Mr T. Jordan said that local bodies j were awaiting the completion of the j building bylaw. He was anxious to see the building code completed after which something could be done about draining and plumbing. He considered that local bodies would welcome anything that could be done in the way of setting up a committee for standardisation, as was evidenced by the fact that they themselves had done this in connection with local body accounts. Mr A. R. Talbraith, chairman of the Advisory Council of the New Zealand j Standards Institute, who presided, said j that considerable work had already been done. He thought that within six months most of the urgent part of the work would be settled as far as the Standards Institute was concerned, and the'matter released for general use. The conference discussed questions relevant to the problem of the standardisation of local body bylaws, particularly those related to building construction. It was emphasised that there could be no disagreement concerning the desirability of proceeding with the proposals for a general f mprovement. Attention to the question was long overdue it was stated, and the hope was expressed that the matter would be vigorously pursued in order to overcome the present anomalies and diversity of regulatory provisions. It was agreed that the whole of the sections of the building code which could logically be assigned to separate committees of the Standards Institute should be so assigned, and the committee instructed to prepare an estimate of the technical assistance required with a view to the completion of the code within six months. It was further resolved to recommend to the Government that a grant should be made from the Consolidated Fund for the development of that work. AN URGENT NECESSITY The Director of Housing Construction (Mr A. Tyndall) sak‘ that the standardisation of building codes and the requirements for the subdivision of land was an urgent necessity not only in New Zealand, but also in other countries. He quoted many anomalous conditions in the housing problem in the United States, particularly with regard

to a multiplicity of minor and conflicting limitations, and said that similar anomalies existed in New Zealand. For example the minimum bylaw requirements in the different boroughs and cities of New Zealand in regard to the frontage of building sections varied from 20 feet to 06 feet, while the minimum area requirements varied from 11 perches to 53 perches. Moreover, sanitary equipment which was not approved in one town was perfectly acceptable in most other towns. There was no doubt that if a standard building code could be framed to suit New Zealand conditions in general, a great service would be rendered to the public and to the building industry.