Tremain Chris: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6671] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to Part 5 of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. As we have said tonight its provisions began as part of the Energy Safety Review Bill and morphed as members know into the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. Before I rose to speak tonight I was thinking about the stages we have gone through on this bill and the various plumbers and electricians who came before the Commerce Committee. I cast my eyes through the telephone book here to see which plumbers from Hawke’s Bay will be sitting tonight with their ears to the radio listening to the debate on this bill. They are the likes of J J O’Connor—the Minister in the chair the Hon Harry Duynhoven may know some of these guys—my own brother who owns Total Plumbing and Irrigation Ltd Rigby Plumbing and Hagen and Owen Ltd. Those are all core guys who are part of the Hawke’s Bay network. In particular I pay my respects to E G Wall a plumber from Hawke’s Bay who passed away recently. He had had over 40 years’ service in the plumbing industry in Hawke’s Bay and he will be difficult to replace. It was guys like E G Wall whom we heard talk before the select committee about some of the issues they would have to face which I will talk about in relation to Part 6 and Part 7 regarding licensing and registration. 
I will step back to Part 5 which deals with the purpose of the bill and gives a number of definitions for the legislation. We spent much time on deciding what the definition of “drain” and “drainlaying” would be and on discussing the meaning of “gasfitting” where a gas supply would start and where it would finish and the meaning of “sanitary plumbing” and various aspects of that part of the bill. Those matters are hardly earth-shattering but are important. In coming back to the purposes of the bill I say this legislation will replace the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act of 1976. It covers the registering licensing and disciplining of plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers and it contains mechanisms designed to assure the public that people engaged in the provision of sanitary plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying services are competent to undertake the work. 
When we first came to the Commerce Committee a number of submissions were before the committee and those submissions were one of the key reasons for this bill being split from the Energy Safety Review Bill. The likes of George M Todd craftsman plumber came before the select committee and told us he strongly opposed the introduction of competency-based licensing and the move away from registration-based licences. In fact that gentleman strongly opposed the Energy Safety Review Bill. He felt that it gave too much power to the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board. That was one of the first reasons for splitting the bill. As Minister Duynhoven announced earlier there had been very poor consultation from the board back to the plumbing fraternity so we made the decision to split this legislation from the Energy Safety Review Bill. That meant we could go back and consult the industry in more detail. 
The second reason for splitting the bill off from the Energy Safety Review Bill has not been covered in much detail tonight. That was the issue around the relationship between the industry training organisation and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board which at that point in time was the subject of a ministerial inquiry undertaken by Hazel Armstrong. But there were two major concerns in that regard. The first was the level of pass rates that were coming out of the industry training organisation. The commentary on the bill states that in 2005 only 11 percent of national certificate holders who sat the final qualifying exam set by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board passed that exam. That was down from a pass rate of 39 percent in 2003. So the second concern was that it was very clear that there had been a breakdown in the relationship between the board and the industry training organisation. The board was putting in a capstone examination and it had failed to talk closely with the industry training organisation. The relationship was so bad that the industry training organisation was not putting through the plumbers at the level that was needed. Those reasons together meant there was a change to the original bill.