Williamson Maurice: Building Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Williamson Maurice: Building Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3810] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction) 
: 
 I move  
That the Building Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time 
. I begin by acknowledging the previous Minister for Building and Construction the Hon Shane Jones who actually introduced the bill into the House just before the end of the last parliamentary term. I would particularly like to pass on my extreme thanks to the Local Government and Environment Committee which I believe worked very well together in refining the bill and bringing some minor amendments back to the House that I think all of the members of the committee across all parties were in reasonably general agreement with. It was nice finally to be involved with a bill that was not terribly controversial. 
This bill takes some initial steps to reduce compliance costs under the Building Act 2004 and to streamline the building consent process. I stress to the House that the bill really is only the beginning of a very long process of reducing that red tape and compliance. The bill has now been considered by the Local Government and Environment Committee which was exceedingly well chaired by Chris Auchinvole and I thank the committee for its careful consideration of the bill and for expediting its passage through the select committee process. It has been a marvellous process. Given the current economic downturn it is important that the bill be progressed quickly so that the sector can benefit from the initiatives in it. 
I take the opportunity now to outline the three simple yet effective initiatives that this bill covers. The bill introduces a streamlined building consent approval process for house designs that are replicated on a substantial basis in order to remove the duplication that occurs when councils have to approve the same or very similar building designs over and over again. Under the bill group home builders will have the opportunity to apply to the Department of Building and Housing for a national multiple-use approval for standard house designs that they use repeatedly. A national multiple-use approval can be included as part of a building consent application to fast track the approval process by councils. The national multiple-use approval is designed to streamline the building consent process for group home builders reduce duplication of process by councils and reduce costs for homeowners. 
The select committee has recommended what I think are two very practical changes to the bill as introduced in relation to the national multiple-use approvals. The first is to provide for regulations that allow minor customisations to be made before and during the construction phase to house designs that already have a national multiple-use approval. This provision will allow for some flexibility and individuality of design by homeowners while still remaining within the scope of that central approval. The second change recommended by the select committee is to provide for regulations that put a limit of a recommended 40 working days on the time taken by the Department of Building and Housing to process a national multiple-use approval. I think that is a realistic time frame and imposing this limit by regulation means that at some stage later another Minister might decide that even 40 working days is too much and may want to bring the length of time back. I believe that these refinements will help to ensure that the national multiple-use approval is commercially viable for group builders. I know they will welcome it—in fact they have been desperately waiting for this legislation to get through. 
The second initiative in the bill is to introduce a streamlined process for making minor variations to building plans after a building consent has been granted. 
Hon David Parker 
: Is that one of Shane Jones’ ideas? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: If the member had been listening with his ears open he would know that at the beginning of my speech I gave Shane Jones a lot of credit. I have already given him some praise. 
The bill enables regulations to be made that define when a variation to consent building work is minor and therefore does not require a formal amendment to the building consent. Again I think most of us in this House will see that as a very sensible move. I know that on a number of occasions when people wanted to make a minor change by slightly moving a hand basin a cupboard or a shower box it quite regularly meant they had to go back to the old consent grinding mill. This initiative will mean that those minor variations can be made without that being necessary. It will save time cost and frustration for building consent applicants as well as for councils. 
The third initiative in the bill is to make obtaining a project information memorandum—known as a “PIM”—voluntary. The initiative will remove the cost of obtaining a project information memorandum for building consent applicants when the information in the memorandum is not considered relevant for a particular building project. Critical notifications previously attached to a project information memorandum will now be attached to the building consent. Councils will continue to promote applying for project information memoranda and doing so early on in the building project. The initiatives in the bill will reduce the time and transaction costs involved in the building consent process for homeowners developers builders and councils and are indeed—as I said earlier on—the first step in the significant amount of reform that is required of the Building Act 2004. 
Once again I give my thanks to the select committee—and in particular to Chris Auchinvole the chair—for the committee’s rapid consideration of the bill. All members of the committee from all parties worked well and the committee has made pragmatic recommendations. I acknowledge the submitters who made written and oral submissions on the bill and the building sector for its input into the formulation of these initiatives. I commend this bill as reported back by the Local Government and Environment Committee to the House.