Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | Video | Questions Of the Day | Search

 


Earthquake-prone building proposals: Have your say

Article for distribution to newspapers
By Hon Maurice Williamson, Minister for Building and Construction

Earthquake-prone building proposals: Have your say

The Government is proposing major changes to how we deal with earthquake-prone buildings, though no decisions have been taken and it’s important that people have their say, writes Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson.

In early December, I released a consultation document proposing far-reaching improvements to New Zealand’s system for managing earthquake-prone buildings.

Currently, local authorities are responsible for decisions on how earthquake-prone buildings in their districts should be dealt with. Some councils have been less active than others, depending on local priorities and views about building risk. This means many earthquake-prone buildings around the country have not even been properly identified, let alone strengthened.

Given the lessons of the Canterbury earthquakes, it seems clear the current system is not delivering good enough results. The public wants greater certainty that the most vulnerable buildings around the country will be identified and remediated.

Under the proposals in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) consultation document, there would be a mandatory national requirement and timeframe for dealing with earthquake-prone buildings.

The proposals require councils to seismically assess all non-residential and multi-unit, multi-storey residential buildings within five years of the changes taking effect. Owners would then have a further ten years to either strengthen or demolish buildings identified as earthquake-prone.

This means all earthquake-prone buildings would be addressed within 15 years of the changes taking effect, compared with an estimated average of 28 years under the current system.

I want to stress that the Government has made no decisions on this. We want to hear the views of both experts and the wider community on how these proposals would affect them. We encourage you to have your say.

Making the right decisions in this area involves striking a careful balance between protecting life and safety on the one hand, and the huge costs of strengthening or demolishing buildings on the other.

There are good arguments for and against pretty much any decision that can be taken.

Major, life-threatening earthquakes are devastating, as Christchurch showed, but fortunately remain very rare. Altogether 483 people have died in earthquakes in New Zealand since 1843 – all but 42 of those perished in the Christchurch and Napier earthquakes. By contrast, around 37,000 people have died in road accidents.

But while the fatality risk from earthquakes is low relative to other risks, major shakes have massive consequences when they strike. Christchurch will take many years to recover fully, and the city will be permanently changed in many ways.

The consultation proposals resulted from a year-long review by MBIE, with input from experts in implementing the current system, including councils, engineers, property owners and heritage building interests.

If implemented, the proposals would involve an estimated spend of around $1.7 billion over a 15 year period. This is based on a broad estimate of 15,000-25,000 earthquake-prone buildings nationwide - though we acknowledge this estimate could understate the true extent of the problem, due to lack of data from many parts of the country.

That level of expense, while large, seems manageable when compared to overall building spending of around $10 billion nationwide each year. But clearly the impact would be uneven – older provincial towns with many unreinforced masonry buildings are likely to be especially affected.

We need to strike a pragmatic and sensible balance that doesn’t load unreasonable costs or strengthening timeframes on these communities, while allowing them to identify and preserve their important heritage buildings.

The Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission recommendations for earthquake-prone buildings were released at the same time as the MBIE proposals. The Royal Commission reached fundamentally similar positions. For example, it recommended retaining the existing threshold for defining an earthquake-prone building, as does the MBIE proposals (one-third of the requirement for a new building, often referred to as 33 per cent of New Building Standard or NBS.)

However, the Royal Commission goes further than MBIE in some respects. In particular, it recommends faster timeframes for assessing and dealing with unreinforced masonry buildings.

It also recommends allowing councils to choose higher strengthening standards than the central government requirement, and it recommends bringing hazardous features of domestic buildings, such as unreinforced masonry chimneys, into the system.

Again, I ask people to take time to read the consultation document (available at www.dbh.govt.nz) and have your say through the online response form. MBIE will run public information meetings in major centres during February, giving you an opportunity to ask questions about the current system and proposed changes.

The decisions we take following this consultation could save lives if and when the next big earthquake strikes.


ENDS

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

Gordon Campbell: On Last Night’s Debate, And The Collins Accusation

Debating is a peculiar discipline in that what you say is less important than how you’re saying it. Looking poised, being articulate and staying on topic generally wins the day – and on that score, Labour leader David Cunliffe won what turned out to be a bruising encounter with Prime Minister John Key last night on TVNZ.

Cunliffe marshalled his points better, kept Key off balance and – more often than not – was in control of the general tenor of the contest. Labour supporters would have been heartened, and given some belated reassurance that maybe the change of leadership last year had been the right decision. More>>

 

Parliament Today:

Gordon Campbell: On Winston Peters' Latest Bout Of Immigrant Bashing

It is only one poll, but rather than cannibalising each other's vote, Colin Craig and Winston Peters do seem to be managing to find the room to co-exist... Few are questioning how Peters got to this happy place, and what it says about the mood of the electorate. More>>

ALSO:

More Immigration News: First People Trafficking Charges

The first people trafficking charges in New Zealand have been brought by Immigration New Zealand (INZ)... The defendants have been charged under the Crimes Act 1961 for arranging by deception the entry of 18 Indian nationals into New Zealand. More>>

Collins 'Misinterprets Media Reports': "Too Compromised To Remain Justice Minister"

Bizarre claims by Judith Collins this morning that she had been cleared of inappropriate behaviour by the Privacy Commissioner demonstrates she is too compromised to remain Justice Minister, Labour MP Grant Robertson says. More>>

ALSO:

Labour On Climate Change: Focus On The Now For The Future

A Labour Government will put in place a comprehensive climate change strategy focusing on both mitigation and adaptation, establish an independent Climate Commission and implement carbon budgeting, says Labour Climate Change spokesperson Moana Mackey. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On National’s Housing Assistance Plan

So, as many as 90,000 people could derive some benefit from National’s housing assistance plans for low and middle-income earners... Yet in reality, the benefits seem likely to be insignificant, and they will be skewed towards those at the top end of the income group that’s supposedly the target. More>>

ALSO:

Election Data Consortium: National’s Worst Case Scenario At Stage One?

A month out from the general election and ipredict traders are still forecasting National’s vote to slip below current polling levels and there is potential for it to fall further. More>>

ALSO:

From The Scoop Video Archive: PM Says SIS "Told Me" About OIA Release

In a press conference immediately following an controversial OIA release of notes on an SIS briefing to then Labour leader Phil Goff, Key said "at that point [Tucker] told me he'd release it ...". Since the release of Nicky Hager's 'Dirty Politics' Key has denied being personally informed and said references by officials to 'the PM' being told briefed referred to his office. He now says the same about his own statement. More>>

ALSO:

  • Scoop Video in the news - New questions over Key claims | NZ Herald News - Stuff.co.nz
  • Earlier - Felix Marwick: Laying out facts over SIS documents - Newstalk ZB
  • Labour - Director’s letter contradicts Key’s claims
  • ACT - The Letter - 26 days to go
  • TV3 Video - Housing issue nudges Dirty Politics aside - David Cunliffe: Key's SIS explanation 'defies belief' - SIS leak came from Key's Office - Goff - Key 'categorically denies' Slater OIA discussion - Video: Key faces more Dirty Politics questions

  • TVNZ - Winston Peters: ‘Dirty Politics' is a new low
  • The Nation - Debate Between Grant Robertson And Russel Norman
  • NZ First - “The Words Mean What I Say They Mean”
  • Get More From Scoop

     

    LATEST HEADLINES

     
     
     
     
     
    More RSS  RSS News AlertsNews Alerts
     
     
     
    Parliament
    Search Scoop  
     
     
    Powered by Vodafone
    NZ independent news