Smith Nick: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Nick: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 24 July 2007. Volume:640;Page:10652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 We should remind ourselves at the beginning of this Committee stage of what this bill is about. Thousands of homeowners for years have been waiting for some justice and some sensible response from the Government to get a solution to the plight of their leaky homes. 
It is almost like Groundhog Day again in Parliament. In 2002 Labour put legislation through this Parliament in a mad rush to provide for the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service. That was a shambles. It did not resolve the problem. Then in 2006 the Minister in the chair Clayton Cosgrove again introduced a bill. There was a review period of about 12 months before that introduction during which owners of leaky homes were told to wait and see because Clayton Cosgrove would have the solution. We then passed that bill in 2006 and here we are not much more than a year later at the Labour Government’s third attempt to find a bill that will solve the problem for those thousands of homeowners.  
I will highlight the statistics of the Government’s record on this issue. Five years down the track the Government has spent $96.4 million on the bureaucracy of what was the leaky home resolution service—which is now the tribunal—yet over those 5 years less than one in six of the lodged claims has been resolved. What we find out is that it is actually costing the taxpayer $131000 for each claim to be resolved—not to fix the house but to pay for the Minister’s bureaucracy. It is madness particularly when we read the figures that show the average settlement is $80000.  
I tell the Minister that it would have been better value for the taxpayer to send the damn cheque to the builder and get the house fixed rather than fund his bloated bureaucracy. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Are you proposing that? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: What I am saying to the Minister is that I would be happy to. Maybe the chirpy Minister would like to tell the Committee whether he thinks taxpayers are getting good value for their money. Oh well the Minister has suddenly gone silent. It is a perfectly reasonable question. We know that he has spent $96.4 million. I ask him whether he thinks taxpayers got value for money.  
Let us look at the figures even for the last month that he has been in charge. If we look at the number of successful claims—and the vote for this year is 23 million bucks so we are looking at about $2 million a month—we see that the official figures on the website show that in the last month he has resolved 10 cases. Ten cases in a month is $200000 a pop I tell the Minister. Over 2 years ago the Minister told the House: “Clayton to the rescue! Now that I am in charge this will all be fixed.” and the situation has got worse.  
Then if we look at the specific provisions in this part of this bill we see that they are to fix up the mess that the Minister was advised of at the time of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act which was passed in 2006. The arrogant Minister who is so typical of this Government’s Ministers said in 2006 that in terms of damages the legislation included general damages claims. He was wrong. He refused to take on board the submissions that were made at that time and that is why we are back in the pickle back in the House—third time round—trying to amend this legislation.  
So National simply says that the legislation has been a failure. If we reflect on the struggle it has been for those thousands and thousands of homeowners— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Keep calm keep calm. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The Minister sarcastically chips in. I ask him again whether he thinks it is good progress to have resolved less than one-sixth of claims 5 years on. And on that basis I tell the Minister it will take us about 26 years to resolve this problem. By anybody’s interpretation that is a failure. That is not good enough. Although National supports the extension for general damages that is in this bill we say that anybody who thinks that this will resolve the problem for owners of leaky homes is simply dreaming. We know this from the record and we know from the poor progress that has been made. Just to revise there have been 4432 claims and 5 years on the Government has resolved 734 of them. This is the issue that the Prime Minister said in 2001 was a non-issue. This is the issue that George Hawkins when he was Minister said would be all over in 12 months. Five years down the track it is not.  
So National is saying that this bill should be passed. It should be passed quickly because it is holding up the process further. I know that both adjudications and other hearings are being held back until this legislation is passed. But I just think we should see a little bit of humbleness from the Minister. He should acknowledge that this bill is before the House only because he got it wrong in 2006; that when he got it wrong in 2006 he ignored submitters to the select committee who claimed that the provision did not include compensation for general damages; and that if he had listened at that time the owners of leaky homes would not now be held up further—waiting for legislation waiting into the never-never for some sort of solution to this problem.  
It has been a failure; $96 million has been spent on a very poor process. This bill patches up bad legislation. We want to see the Minister take some responsibility and we are keen to get this law on to the statute book as soon as possible.