Simpson Scott: Building (Pools) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Building (Pools) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 16 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): I do not think that there would be any New Zealanders either pool owners or non - pool owners who would consider for one minute that the original legislation that was set up nearly 30 years ago was not well intentioned. At the time the statistics for young New Zealanders who were drowning were truly appalling and something needed to be done to remedy them. But as is often the case with good intentions sometimes the road to the ultimate result can be paved with all kinds of fraught difficulties and potholes and problems along the way. So it became very obvious relatively quickly after the passing of the original legislation in 1987 that there were some frustrating inconsistencies with the legislation.As someone who over the years has owned a couple of houses that have had swimming pools when I had young children who were using those swimming pools I became completely frustrated with the process and inconsistency that occurred in terms of compliance with a very good well-intentioned piece of legislation. When you have a problem that is trying to be solved by legislation that is well intentioned but the net result is one of frustration and inconsistency for the people who are trying to make that legislation work—the pool owners who understand the risks for young children young neighbours and people like that who maybe are not able to be watched by their parents or caregivers every second of every minute of every hour of every day—then there are enormous difficulties in making that piece of legislation work. So this piece of sensible pragmatic law that is being proposed in the Building (Pools) Amendment Bill I think comes as keenly awaited by many thousands of swimming pool owners across the country.The bill is a sensible pragmatic solution to what has been a frustrating and inconsistent piece of legislation for nearly 30 years—frustrating and inconsistent but not poorly intentioned as I said. The aim of this piece of legislation is to repeal the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 and I would say not before time. To then include this in building legislation also makes perfect sense as far as I can see. At the moment the current rules are confused they are inconsistent and they are treated differently in different parts of the country. One local council will do checks more regularly than another local council. There will be inconsistencies in how the closure rates of gates are measured their height and all those sorts of things. There are also inconsistencies to do with the types of fencing or barriers required. So I am delighted that this piece of legislation will provide a greater degree of certainty and consistency across the country and as I said that is not before time.The practical approach to spa pools and hot tubs I think is also something that will be welcomed by the people who own them. One of the annoying and frustrating aspects in the area of spa pools and hot tubs for people who have them is that they have been required to get separate consents for them. I understand that in this legislation the intention is to remove the requirement for consents for the installation and use of hot tubs and spa pools. That will come as a welcome measure on behalf of the people who own them. But more so will be the requirement that having lockable and permanent lids or covers for hot tubs and spa pools will now be the method by which the legislative requirements can be met and provided for. That is also a sensible and pragmatic approach.This bill will reduce compliance costs across the country by many millions of dollars I suspect over the course of its duration. The associated costs for swimming pool owners and spa pool owners over the years have been quite enormous. We understand obviously the gains that have been made in terms of saving lives from drowning have been very very good but they come at a high level of frustration and cost. So to have those frustrations removed and the costs minimised I think will be very very welcome.I am sure we are going to get an awful lot of submissions at the select committee notwithstanding that this is I hope something that will be treated across the House in a non-controversial way. I think there will be a large number of both organisations and individuals who own swimming pools and spa pools who will want to make the point that they have found this existing legislation to be frustrating and difficult to work with. I am very much looking forward to chairing the committee as we go through this process in the House. I think that this bill is as I say keenly awaited by the many thousands of people who own and operate swimming pools hot tubs and spas. It is a timely and useful piece of legislation that I think will relieve the frustrations of a great number of people whilst at the same time not removing in any way the obligations on those people to ensure that swimming pools hot tubs and spas are safe and that our young children in particular are protected from the risks of drowning in unnecessary circumstances. I commend this bill to the House and I look forward to it progressing through the House.