Macindoe Tim: Building Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Macindoe Tim: Building Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 July 2009. Volume:656;Page:5201. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Kia ora e te Whare. I welcome this opportunity to add my voice in support of the third reading of the Building Amendment Bill (No 2) although my voice is not as reliable tonight as I would like it to be. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Feel free to lose it. 
TIM MACINDOE 
: I thank Mr Cosgrove. I appreciate his advice but as in all things I will not be taking it. 
I especially welcome the knowledge that there is multiparty support in this House for the bill’s progression through to enactment. As has been noted there were 17 submissions to the Local Government and Environment Committee on this bill. Submitters were overwhelmingly supportive of what is proposed as a result of which only minor changes were required. As the Minister for Building and Construction did in earlier stages I acknowledge the preliminary work on this measure that was undertaken by the former Minister for Building and Construction the Hon Shane Jones. 
Katrina Shanks 
: Which one? There were 11 of them. 
TIM MACINDOE 
: Well I am particularly acknowledging the Hon Shane Jones. He is paying me the compliment of sitting there and listening attentively to what I am saying— 
Hon Shane Jones 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I can assure the House that there is only one Shane Jones not 10 of them. 
TIM MACINDOE 
: What an outstanding point of order that was; I am positively stopped in my tracks. As I say it is good to have the former Minister the Hon Shane Jones sitting and listening attentively and appreciatively to this speech tonight and it is good to follow him in this third reading.  
As I understand I am the final speaker in this debate. I simply want to reiterate and endorse the main purposes and expected benefits of this bill. In fact I gather there may even be one more speaker which is exciting beyond measure. I want to endorse the main purposes of this bill which will be widely welcomed by representatives of the construction industry developers property owners and one would hope local authority officials who are charged with processing building consent applications. At a time when New Zealanders are crying out for action to cut unnecessary red tape and compliance costs it is heartening to debate a measure in this House that should substantially realise those objectives. My only regret is that it did not happen a long time ago. 
Last week the Hon Maryan Street lamented a perceived lack of focus in speeches made by members on this side of the House on the issue of housing affordability. That is more than a little surprising given that this Government has identified that as a priority issue and that I am standing here tonight beside the Minister of Housing who is working outstandingly hard and with tremendous and inspiring success on these measures. He is working very constructively if the Minister will excuse the pun to promote tangible measures that will achieve that goal. I simply say to the Hon Maryan Street to watch this space. It seems to me that Ms Street was struggling to find controversy where it does not exist— 
Hon Phil Heatley 
: And Maurice Williamson. 
TIM MACINDOE 
: —and as the Minister of Housing so rightly observes the Hon Maurice Williamson. 
The initiatives in the bill may have only a modest impact—it has to be admitted—on the total cost of building. However and this is what is important they are also expected to reduce the time and transaction costs that the building consent process involves for homeowners developers and builders and for building consent authorities. The bill will also make the building consent process more responsive to different levels of risk and this of course is something that the industry is really looking for. 
As has been noted the bill addresses in particular low-risk building work such as building designs that are replicated on scale. Given the way things have developed in the construction industry in New Zealand in recent times we are probably seeing more and more construction projects of that type. This is certainly true in my own city of Hamilton where affordable housing is very important but also where there is considerable development. There is great growth and great demand as a result of our population increase. Hamilton is after all the most vibrant and exciting city in New Zealand in which to live as a result of which everybody is migrating to our fine and delightfully weather-reliable city which is totally free of fog and all sorts of other impediments. It is a very noticeable feature that these scale projects replica projects are becoming more and more apparent and it therefore makes abundant sense obviously to ensure that they can be constructed with the minimum of bureaucracy the minimum of red tape— 
Katrina Shanks 
: The minimum of regulation. 
TIM MACINDOE 
: Absolutely; as my fine colleague Katrina Shanks has mentioned reducing regulation will enable people to get on with the job to construct these properties. This is what our city is crying out for. This is what we can do as one of the measures to promote housing affordability to ensure that more New Zealanders can realise the aspiration of homeownership that we as New Zealanders see almost as our birthright. 
The bill also addresses the important need to be able to make changes to building consents that do not affect compliance with the New Zealand building code. Finally the bill addresses the issue of building projects that do not benefit from the information provided in a project information memorandum. 
These are welcome and worthy objectives. I am sure they will be broadly welcomed and before my throat gives out altogether I have great pleasure in commending the bill to the House.