Williams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 11 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11967. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First)to theMinister for Building and Construction: Has he received any reports of substandard buildings being built as part of the Christchurch rebuild; if so how many buildings are known to be substandard?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Building and Construction):No I have not. During the course of the removal of Christchurch City Council’s accreditation by International Accreditation New Zealand IANZ did identify 17 consents that it had some concerns with. Staff from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment have gone back and looked at all 17 of those consents and have found that where they did not comply it was of a minor technical nature with regard to paperwork and documentation but the consents are indeed sound with regard to the buildings themselves.Andrew Williams: When was the Minister first informed that there were issues regarding building standards as part of the Christchurch rebuild and what action if any did he take to address these issues?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: The first I was informed was on 6 June after International Accreditation New Zealand had published its 1-month notice document on 28 May. At that stage we had Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment officials in the Christchurch City Council working alongside—in fact we had actually had them there for some time before but they intensified their work from that point on—to be able to satisfy ourselves that the consents being issued were actually sound.Andrew Williams: Why has it taken his officials until today only after the lodging of this question this morning to contact engineers who have previously raised concerns with him and his department when those engineers made him fully aware of their concerns as far back as 2008 and he chose to do nothing?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: If the member is referring to MrScarry then I say to him this: if MrScarry does have a particular building—Grant Robertson: “Scarry”. That’s the other book you were reading Maurice.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: Well I am going to choose to pronounce it as “Scary” and I can tell him that if MrScarry does have a particular building that he thinks has a problem then he has a moral obligation to bring that building to our attention and not use a scattergun approach of just saying “I know of buildings” but not giving us the details.Andrew Williams: I seek leave of the House to table three emails from structural engineers including Mr JohnScarry in relation to information and advising the Minister as far back as 2008 on this issue.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is none. They can be tabled.Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.Andrew Williams: What did he do about the serious problems in the building consent authority functions of the Christchurch City Council which included approximately 18 months post earthquakes given his department was made aware of these problems as far back as 2009?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: Many of the issues around the Christchurch City Council were of a similar nature to those that many other councils have had with regard to complying with the accreditation process of International Accreditation New Zealand. In fact in the September report of last year the Christchurch City Council was not the worst of all the councils in New Zealand with regard to that compliance. However in the May report of this year six corrective actions were identified that were incredibly serious. It was those six actions that International Accreditation New Zealand said it would withdraw the accreditation from and on 29 June that is what happened.Andrew Williams: What does the Minister know about a building that is now referred to as the “Son of CTV Building” because it has a similar structure and design to the original CTV Building which collapsed with great catastrophe and does he now agree with structural engineer JohnScarry who commented in August last year that some members of the building industry were guilty of allowing illegal building practices in Christchurch under his watch?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: Once again I will tell the member that it is officials in my department who advise me as to whether buildings meet the code or not. After the CTV Building collapsed Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment officials went and identified about 300 buildings across New Zealand that were of asimilar genre of a similar style and of a similar design. So far every one of the evaluations they have done of those buildings has come back as the buildings being OK. But again I repeat that if the member wants to bring to me the case of a specific building my officials will look at it. There is no benefit for me in ignoring such advice and I will have the building looked at by them.Hon Lianne Dalziel: Does he stand by his statement onCheckpoint last week that the Government would never have allowed consenting to carry on if it did not comply with the law; if so why was the Christchurch City Council building consent authority allowed to do so in light of the September report from International Accreditation New Zealand which included the six corrective action requests or does he still not realise that that is actually what the report says?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I am delighted that the member has raised theCheckpointinterview because immediately after theCheckpointinterview the chief executive of International Accreditation New Zealand wrote to me and said that Mary Wilson onCheckpoint had got it wrong. None of the consents issued were illegal. What they did have were concerns about compliance with the building code but actually no illegal consents or consents that were not consistent with the law had been issued.Hon Lianne Dalziel: I seek leave to table the transcript from thatCheckpoint interview—Mr SPEAKER: No. [Interruption ] Order! That information is freely accessible by any member who wants to get it.Hon Lianne Dalziel: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The difficulty that I have is that the Minister referred to a statement as if the interviewer made it. He was the one—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is now a debating point. If the member has further supplementary questions she can use them but it is not a means of justifying the tabling of a radio transcript.Hon Maurice Williamson: I seek leave to table the letter from the chief executive of International Accreditation New Zealand to me pointing out that what was raised on that programme was incorrect.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that letter. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Lianne Dalziel: Was it the Minister who in fact used the word “illegal” in the interview with Mary Wilson onCheckpoint ?Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I would be foolish to try to recall every word used in the interview but I do know that the words used during the interview by the person doing it Mary Wilson were incorrect and that is what the chief executive wrote the letter to me to correct—what Mary Wilson had said.