Heatley Phil: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — Recommittal In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Remedies) Amendment Bill — Recommittal In Committee 
[Volume:641;Page:10957] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I rise to speak about Part 1 and about the clauses in the Supplementary Order Paper that obviously affect Part 1 and that change the meaning and interpretation of that part as we originally debated it I believe the week before last. One of the difficulties we have of course in having confidence in these particular clauses and in the Supplementary Order Paper affecting Part 1 is that they have not gone through the normal select committee process whereby we can consider them in depth. For instance in Supplementary Order Paper 133 under “Heading to Part 1” the amendment states: “To omit ‘General provisions’ … and substitute ‘Purpose and application of Part 2’.” It seems to us that that change gives more emphasis to the purpose and the application of Part 2. Yet when we said originally that we would support this bill and particularly Part 1 our concern was for the fact that general damages could be claimed by those people seeking out the service of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service. 
It is no surprise to us that New Zealanders across this country many of them vulnerable and many of them elderly are having to deal with all sorts of stresses costs and burdens as their houses continue to leak and rot while this Minister bowls up year after year to make amendments to the original legislation which first came into the House in 2002. That legislation was ill-considered so legislation had to be brought into this House again in 2006. That too was ill-considered so legislation has had to come into this House again this year at this time to fix the leaky homes problem. Again the legislation is ill-considered and we find ourselves with a Supplementary Order Paper presented to us at the eleventh hour to somehow fix Part 1 which we are considering here tonight. 
So it is no surprise to us that many New Zealanders across the country often elderly and often vulnerable who are sitting in leaky and rotting homes right now and who are filled with stress and concern will go straight to these new provisions in Part 1. They will walk off to court with them under their arms and they will now be able to bring an eligible claim under clause 4(a): “… for general damages (for example for relevant mental distress) or for any other remedy that could be claimed in a court of law in relation to or for consequences of all or any of specified damage deficiencies loss of value and penetration of water;”. 
But it is that focus on “general damages”—for example “relevant mental distress”—that is of most concern to us in the National Party. We would have liked to see the leaky homes issues resolved very shortly after the problems were first discovered which was early in 2000-2001. Here we are in 2007 under this Labour Government still trying to pass legislation that will alleviate the stress of those New Zealanders who are now sitting in rotting homes those New Zealanders who demand their day in court and those elderly and vulnerable New Zealanders in particular who do not have years of earning power ahead of them to resolve their own leaky home crisis. 
 That is why I bring the focus of this particular chairperson and the Labour Party on to the purpose of this legislation and the provision in the legislation that people can now claim for “relevant mental distress”. I can tell the Committee that there is a fair bit of mental stress going on in this country because of this leaky homes crisis—stress that is no less so because it has taken 7 years for this Government to resolve this crisis through legislation. It is also quite appalling to me that this legislation would try to bring district councils to account when they too are in the dark as to what direction they are getting from central government.