Tisch Lindsay: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:633;Page:5082] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 Members have heard contributions from experts in the field on the Opposition side of the House. We had the Hon Dr Nick Smith who has an interest in the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service. He was able to crystallise and articulate arguments about the shortcomings of this bill—a bill that is too late and too short—and articulate where National would be looking to make changes to it in the select committee. 
We heard from Phil Heatley who is our spokesman on housing and has taken an immense interest in the issues surrounding housing within New Zealand. He talked about how we should be looking at standards and how standards which are not in this bill should be incorporated in it. If there were to be any measure of success and any measure of progress that needs to be achieved by this amendment legislation then we should look at incorporating standards. 
My colleague Bob Clarkson probably knows more about the building industry than anybody in this House. He has probably built more buildings than we could ever count and has been associated with major developments. So he has an understanding of the core elements and core values that are necessary to build a building that will stand the test of time will last for a long long time and will not have the problems that homeowners and those in residential properties are having to contend with. 
As I said before this bill is too late and does not go far enough. If we look at some of the statistics we will see that the cost of going to mediation is $80000 per house. Yet what is the average cost of carrying out the repairs? It is $72000. Why does it cost more to get an answer than to do the work? 
Hon Member 
: That is Labour! 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: Well there we are. All the compliance costs that go into this are absolutely outrageous. The issues for the victims—those who have the problems with housing and leaky homes—should be addressed and the money should be put into those resources. Victims should not be handicapped and shackled because of the bureaucracy that it takes to deal with the problem. 
There are 15000 claims outstanding. Do members know that on the basis of the rate of claims lodged at the moment and those that are settled it will take 75 years to clear those claims? Where is the Government’s priority for those people who are affected by leaky homes? This bill is as I said too short and too late. It does not go anywhere. The Minister is building up a bureaucracy that will not solve the issues we have identified. In fact over the last year 200 claims were settled but how many claims were lodged at the same time? I ask members to guess how many claims were lodged. I tell members that 584 claims were lodged more than double the number that were actually resolved. 
Brian Connell 
: That means the problem is getting worse. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: The problem is getting worse as I said and as my colleague identifies very correctly. There are 15000 outstanding claims. 
We have looked at what this bill does and as my colleague Bob Clarkson said we will be supporting its referral to the select committee. But I can tell members that very close scrutiny will be given to how it will work and how it will impact on those people who have put their money at risk. This issue concerns their pension this concerns their superannuation and they should expect something better than this. In the last 7 years the Government has done absolutely nothing to help those people. 
Let us see what the Government is going to do under this legislation. Well it is to change the name of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service that is operating now. It is to create another organisation that will be called the Weathertight Homes Tribunal. How will a tribunal fix the problem that these homeowners have? We already have the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service so why do we need—and this is a key change in the bill—“a new Weathertight Homes Tribunal to provide strengthened adjudication services:”? How will that help those people out there with leaky homes? This Government is stuffing around and is not being serious about the issue and those people are bleeding. They do not have money and they are living in homes that are leaking. That leads to adverse health effects—people are getting sick because they are living in those environments—yet the Government is mucking around. 
Let us look at the other key changes in the bill. “A wider scope of claims …” will be included. Well that is great but how does it actually help the 15000 people who now have claims waiting to be assessed? 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Read the bill! 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: I have the bill—I am quoting from it. Let us look at the provision for “a low-value claims process”. That is all right; I have no problem with that. The change to “a class action approach to claims” is OK. But “improved processes and case management.”—what does that actually mean? 
Although we support this bill going to the select committee stage—with reservations I might add—we give notice that we want very robust and transparent legislation that will help all the people who are affected by this problem. The degree of frustration amongst homeowners is growing; it is becoming quite extreme. We are not prepared to accept that. This bill tinkers at the edges only and in the select committee we will make sure we get the robustness and transparency that we believe is important. 
Buying a home is probably the biggest investment one ever makes. It takes years to get a home. We know how difficult it is to become a homeowner so when somebody finds fault with his or her place because it has not been built right— 
Craig Foss 
: Bad tiling. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: It could be bad tiling or it could be the plumbing; it could be a number of issues. 
Hon Member 
: Cheap tiling. 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: It could be cheap tiling. Those things could lead to those deficiencies. Homeowners do not have expertise regarding building. A homeowner does not necessarily have the expertise required to know whether a house is being built correctly. Homeowners rely on the reliability and professionalism of those tradespeople whose job it is to build it—that is what tradespeople are employed to do. We put our faith in them. It is only someone like Bob Clarkson who has an understanding of the industry and can see where the rorts are who actually knows how to build correctly. He has been a practitioner—he is a practitioner—and he knows exactly how buildings should be built. 
 This is important legislation. We do not believe that just tinkering at the edges of the process will improve the lot of the 15000 claimants who are affected today. We do not believe that this bill goes far enough to be able to expedite their claims. There is money at risk. Those people are concerned about their livelihoods and their investments. A house is probably the biggest investment they will ever make and it is important we get this legislation right. As Mr Clarkson said we do not want to come back here in a couple of years’ time to sort out more problems. At that stage National will be in Government and I can tell members that we will sort it out then. But let us sort it out now. We have an opportunity to do so. We have the expertise and we know what has to be done. Let us make sure during the select committee process that we make this legislation work. 
Bill read a first time.