Page 2408 - Week 06 - Thursday, 24 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
One particular area which is specifically COLA related and which needs work, I believe, is improving the auditing and monitoring of building certifiers and, as part of that, making sure that on-site inspections become a more integral part of building certification processes. I am aware that some certification is done with a certifier never having physically seen what they are certifying. It is purely done on the paperwork. This is an area where the certifiers, I think, probably need to do more. The government needs to do more in terms of auditing the certifiers. Ultimately, I guess, it is a question of resources. ACTPLA needs to have the resources to go and audit that everything has been done correctly.
We also need to see more distance put between the builder and the building certifier. A number of proposals have been put forward around this. I do not have a view at this stage as to exactly how that should be done. One suggestion that has been made is that the building certifier report directly to ACTPLA rather than to the builder. This would clarify that the certifier is engaged by the building owner, not by the builder. I know quite a few people think that these certifiers are engaged by the builder. It is just that they get a separate bill for it. That is the only reason they have any idea—
Mr Barr interjecting—
MS LE COUTEUR: It is a consumer issue, but it is all related to the building quality. These are COLA-regulated occupations. It has also been suggested to me—this is for another COLA bill—that maybe there needs to be a new occupation of water proofing because that seems to be one of the areas—
Mr Barr: We’re looking at that, yes.
MS LE COUTEUR: I am glad to see this may be in a COLA bill to come. I am looking forward to a few more COLA bills here. The Greens have also been watching, as I said, this whole area and the negotiations between the Owners Corporation Network, the various arms of the building industry, the government and other stakeholders. We hope to see further improvements via the COLA legislative reform program in coming months.
Another COLA area which I am fairly confident will be coming up very soon—I think it might be the next one—concerns energy efficiency ratings assessors. I am glad to see the minister nodding on that one. The lack of certification is an issue. It does not have the potential dangers, obviously, of certifying buildings without proper inspections, but it is of concern that building owners simply are not always getting what they have paid for. As buildings are a long-term investment this is a very significant issue.
As I explained in February, we see a number of houses which should have been five-star houses when they were constructed—they had to have been certified as five-star houses to be constructed—but when they are reassessed for resale their energy efficiency rating can be as low as three or even 2½ stars. I appreciate that things can change, but it is almost unbelievable that a house could be correctly certified as five stars when it was built when you see some of the ratings that now come up through the sale of premises legislation. I am very concerned about the lack
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video