Jones Shane: Building Amendment Bill (No 4) — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeJones Shane: Building Amendment Bill (No 4) — Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 19 November 2013. Volume:695;Page:14968. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SHANE JONES (Labour): I would like to acknowledge the Minister in the chair the Minister for Building and Construction and my colleague Raymond Huo who until recently was shepherding this shadow portfolio through our caucus and I endorse a number of the things that he has pointed out this evening. I am quite sure that the Minister himself realises that it is a work in progress.I would say that the difficulty with this bill the Building Amendment Bill (No 4) is that the train has left the station and it is on its trajectory. This debate is about how to get the balance between those consumers who want efficiency speed and the delivery of the product because many of them have upset wives or husbands at home and they do not want the hammers being bashed around too long for renovations etc. and those—and my colleague Raymond Huo has highlighted their identity—who believe that the fallout of the leaky homes saga is such that we should always go for a belts and braces approach.It is a rather unique collection of individuals we have here. We have Mr Cosgrove a former building Minister; we have the Hon Maurice Williamson; and we have my good self. The problem I have is that I was also the Associate Minister of Immigration and I can tell you that that was far more hazardous than being the building Minister. Buthaving said that quite a few of the things in the bill we do think will work but it did not quite get there from our perspective.But having said that we are conscious of what the Minister said. A number of these refinements—it is the genuine belief of the Minister and his colleagues and I guess the professional advisers—will expedite work in Christchurch but not the highly technical demanding work that needs a whole panel of engineers. And I am not talking about the disgraced engineer Alan Reay whose name unfortunately blighted the splendour and majesty of this Chamber recently. But that aside I am talking about those who are proud of their profession. I am talking about those who realise that to have a durable city you need accountable professionals.I do feel that we should if we can at all times enhance the importance of consumer protection whilst at the same time giving a bit scope and space because as we go forward during this transition nothing is static and there will be a need to refine it as we go forward.I will not talk too much about dam safety although unless Nick Smith’s stewardship of the Ruataniwha dam fiasco proposal improves this bill will not ever have any application in Hawke’s Bay in terms of dam safety. That is a bit of a shame because I was born and bred on a farm and I realise the importance of irrigation etc. but now that I am a professional politician and a member of the august Labour Party caucus the importance of process has been brought home to me as well. The processes that we had in Awanui and Kaitāia were possibly a tad more pragmatic than what I have learnt to accept is resource management law—but that is for another discussion.I would say that this is work that we initiated and the Minister for Building and Construction has carried it on. Phil Twyford looked at it and more recently Mr Huo has looked at it. Let us acknowledge that there are areas that we slightly agree on. We are all deeply committed to ensuring that the building framework meets not only the needs of consumers but also the needs of the regulator. I hope that they can make a call and shift the balance. I am of the view that if you can rely on an electrician and if you can rely on a plumber then what we thought we were doing—the Hon Clayton Cosgrove and I in Helen Clark’s time quite apart from listening to every word that she ever uttered—[Interruption] Well there were one or three words that I conveniently overlooked. But it was as the Minister for Building and Construction that I recall saying: “I don’t think it’s a good idea that we should actually regulate for the amount of water that comes out of the showerhead.” I was acquainted with the fact that it was Green Party policy and I should defend it—it is sad that nobody came to my defence when I was caught in the trenches but you learn these things when you are No. 18. We cannot support the bill but we support the sentiments in there. Kia ora tātou.