Connell Brian: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Connell Brian: Building Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:619;Page:14865] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 We are now on to Part 5 and could easily forget that the genesis of this bill was leaky homes. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Where’s that in the bill? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: It is not in the bill. I have gone through it. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Are you sure it’s leaky homes? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: It was that long ago that one starts to test oneself and to question oneself. However it was to do with leaky homes. Then we narrowed the issue down to not the timber industry or the forestry industry which this Government was so quick to pounce on but design. Now we have a list of offences a list of penalties and criminal proceedings that are out of all proportion to the issues at hand. 
Mr Catchpole has said throughout the course of this debate that his party supports this legislation but we could have been forgiven for thinking that it did not after listening to his last call and to his series of questions to the Associate Minister of Commerce. I wondered why the Minister responded to those questions—he did not have to. I thought the answers were pretty self-evident. However what I am concerned about like so many others is— 
Brent Catchpole 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The previous speaker and the member who is speaking now have implied that New Zealand First has made certain statements. The statement quoted by the previous speaker came from somewhere other than the whips’ office. It is definitely not part of New Zealand First policy. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: If the member considers that he has been misrepresented then he should look at Speaker’s ruling 35/3. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. As the member has already been disrupted I point out that I have been trying to listen to him but there is a Government member standing in the aisle carrying on a conversation. I regard it as grossly disorderly for Government members to come across the Chamber like that. If they want to have a conversation with their mates they should go out in the lobbies to do so. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Yes Standing Order 82 states that members should be seated. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: The tactics of the New Zealand First member to disrupt me will not put me off. What they do is bring into clear focus that a vote for New Zealand First is a vote for the Government. That is the way New Zealand First members are positioning themselves. We have called them to book and the member does not like it very much but that is the reality. 
Clause 317 lists the penalty for not having a code compliance certificate and that penalty is $200000. John Tamihere the champion— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: For not having a piece of paper. The building might be perfect. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: The building will in all probability be perfect—I have a lot of confidence in the hard-working builders of this country—but people will be penalised if they do not have a piece of paper. John Tamihere the self-proclaimed champion of small-business people in this country is sitting there mute and letting that happen. But it gets worse. For every day thereafter that there is not a compliance certificate John Tamihere allows his Government to whack these people for another $20000 and Mr Catchpole gets up and says: “We in New Zealand First are voting for this because we think it is good.” 
“Mr Gorbachev” took a call before on clause 317A and he spoke about Mr Ardern being wrong about residential property not being part of clause 317A. That member cannot understand that clause but I can. Clause 317A is titled “Offence for residential property developer to transfer household unit without code compliance certificate”. That is the point he was making! 
Murray Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It appears that the member has referred to me as “Mr Gorbachev”. That is not my name and I think he should get it right. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Under the Standing Orders one is supposed to keep awake and one is supposed to raise a point of order at the time—not realise 3 minutes later that perhaps one has been referred to as “Mr Gorbachev”. But in that member’s case he should be flattered. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Mr Prebble is quite right. The member might like to look at Speakers’ rulings 20/2 and 19/2. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: One would be forgiven for thinking that this legislation had been developed because the whole building industry was out of control. Leaky homes accounted for 1 percent—perhaps not even that; 0.5 percent if that—of all the building problems in this country. For generation after generation the builders of this country have built very solid longstanding quality homes. Now we have legislation that is targeting the probably 0.01 percent of builders in this country who are shonky. The probability that those people will be caught out is remote because people who are engaged in shonky practice will not stay in it anyway. The biggest concern is that we are creating legislation that will penalise 99.9 percent of builders in this country.