Paraone Pita: Building Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Paraone Pita: Building Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:10841] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I stand on behalf of New Zealand First to take a call in the first reading of the Building Amendment Bill. [ 
Interruption 
] Do not worry about my leader; the real issue is that at least my leader knows which party he is leading. 
I come back to the point of the debate. Given that this country has suffered from leaky homes and given that in recent months some householders have had to endure flooding and inclement weather I would have thought this House would look at this bill as a form of helping those people who have had to endure the effects of those events on their homes and in some cases their livelihood. I believe that this legislation is responsible. It is aimed at addressing the issues that people who have already spoken in this House have mentioned. It ensures that homes that are given certification are in fact durable. It ensures that we as a nation are not confronted by the leaky home syndrome which some families are still having to suffer the consequences of. 
One speaker talked about affordability. I do not have any difficulty with the issue of affordability. I think that if we as a country are able to provide houses that our citizens can afford well and good but they need to be quality houses. How do we ensure that? I know that it has been part of the Kiwi psyche to do things for ourselves but is it not important that people who buy homes that had work done on them by DIYers can know that the work was carried out by people who had the qualifications and necessary skills to do it? 
Bob Clarkson 
: Hang on; DIYers do it better a lot of the time. 
PITA PARAONE 
: Maybe so but is it not important that people who are buying a home built by a DIYer know that in return for the money they are expending to purchase it they are getting a home of the quality one would expect from a qualified builder? 
The bill clarifies and recognises building consent exemptions. In particular it ensures that weathertightness repairs are not made without a building consent. 
The bill makes minor adjustments to the future dam safety scheme. I know that that recognises some of the difficulties that some regional councils particularly the smaller regional councils around the country are facing in terms of having enough time to gain the required accreditation. The dams that we are talking about are in the South Island. I was born and bred in the area covered by the Far North District Council and although it does not have any dams of the same magnitude as those in the South Island I am sure that the notion of dams was given some thought during the recent flooding in that area. 
The bill also clarifies the language and rules relating to the upcoming voluntary licensing of building practitioners. Licensing will not change legal liability but will mean increased accountability and competence. Who in this House would argue against that? New Zealand First supports any move to improve the clarity and effectiveness of the regulatory framework governing the building and construction sector. It will be of benefit to all New Zealanders. We believe that it will go some way towards putting back ordinary homeowners’ confidence in the New Zealand building industry in the wake of recent bad press and for example the leaky homes fiasco. It will ensure that the Building Act 2004 is a robust instrument for regulating a safe and high-quality New Zealand building and construction industry into the future. 
I know that one of this Government’s concerns was the ability of local bodies to obtain the necessary accreditation in order for them to continue to issue the documents that are required to allow building to proceed. Experience has shown that to date only one local body has been able to reach the original 30 November deadline. What happens if we retain that deadline and the rest of the local bodies around the country are not able to meet it? We will not see development; we will not see all the concerns that this bill addresses progress in this country. The Government has decided that through this bill the time should be extended to 30 June 2008. Again I ask who in this House would argue against that. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: It is a mess. 
PITA PARAONE 
: Well this bill addresses the issue and tries to tidy it up. Why would the member want to oppose that? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why wasn’t it in the bill? 
PITA PARAONE 
: Well that might be so but we have to deal with the realities at this point in time. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: It is incompetent. 
PITA PARAONE 
: I would not agree with the member that it is incompetent. At least this Government is addressing the issue rather than just finding petty arguments to oppose the bill—yet at the same time not oppose it. 
I commend this bill to this House. New Zealand First supports the referral of this bill to a select committee. Why? We have always believed that the people of New Zealand should be given the opportunity to discuss legislation that comes before this House and referring it to a select committee allows that to occur. I commend this bill to the House and New Zealand First will be supporting it.