“DRAG ON INDUSTRY”

Taranaki Daily News, 1 December 1932, Page 7

“DRAG ON INDUSTRY”

RTTH .DING CONSTRUCTION BILL INDUSTRY IN STRAIT-JACKET. “The capital that has.been paralysed and the industrial expansion that has been repressed by Government regulations is unfortunately beyond computation,” says a statement by the Associated Chambers of Commerce. “The Building Construction Bill of the Government is the latest measure that will have the effect of robbing an industry of its freedom and placing.it in a straitjacket* “Twelve months have been available in which to recast the Bill completely to meet the objections that caused it to be shelved on the earlier Occasion, but it is presented in the same form as it left the Local Bills’ Committee of the House a year ago. A ready admission of the principle that the safeguarding of life in the event of an earthquake catastrophe is desirable, does not mean that, the community must be forced to accept an objectionable system. The present Bill provides for a bureaucratic, expensive and top-heavy method. It follows slavishly the well-worn grooves of restrictive 1 legislation. Ordefs-in-Council, costly and arbitrary administration, and an extension of State inspection, which together are smothering many kinds of commercial and industrial activity throughout the country. “It is proposed to secure revenue by levying additional fees on building permits. Taking the average value of building operations, for the ten years 1921-22 to 1930-31, the fees would produce in excess of £lO,OOO per annum. These taxes are to be paid by one section only of the community, namely, those who build. This is an unfair distinction. Since the benefit of the whole community it intended, then the whole community should meet, through the Consolidated Fund, any expenditure considered to be necessary for the purpose of ensuring safety in building construction. That principle applies also to any expenditure on research into building designs. There is, however, no real need to set up expensive machinery for research purposes, since the collection of information could be done through existing departmental machinery, while the expenditure of £lO,OOO per annum on administration is an extravagance.

“New by-laws are to be imposed from time to time at the will of a permanent committee, so that a building that is constructed to-day in according with the by-laws may have to be altered later to conform to other by-laws that the committee may see fit to impose. A permanent, paid committee evolving by-laws is an unnecessary expense, and a mischievous deterrent to new building schemes. “No consideration is extended to the property owner, in whose hands, after all, it rests as to whether a building is erected at all, and who will have to meet the extra building costs that this Bill will bring about. He is given no right of appeal, and no consideration as to his financial ability to alter, demolish or remove pre-existing structures (as he can be compelled to do) since he is being held responsible for any past structural weaknesses in connection with earthquake resistance—details of which even experts to-day have no proper knowledge. The effect of the system proposed by the Building Construction Bill will be to discourage capital from investment in mortar and steel, ultimately' to reduce building activity and to increase rents.