Sorting out building consent delays requires rounding up the cowboys
Article in The Post, 3rd April 2025
Nick Hill is the chief executive of the Building Officials Institute of New Zealand (Boinz), the peak body representing the building surveying sector which includes building controls, building inspection and specialist property inspection.
Over two-thirds of building consent applications submitted to councils last year required a request for more information (RFI) – that’s a concern.
So, Minister of Building and Construction Chris Penk is right in calling it out – among other concerns identified in the annual building consent monitoring data for 2024, released last week.
But in pointing the finger at councils for “stopping the clock” on “apparent” non-compliance he’s missed the point.
Building surveyors within our building consent authorities (BCAs) are the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, safeguarding our building owners and users from poor quality building design and construction.
In making RFIs, they are doing what they are legally required to do – identify applications that do not comply with the New Zealand Building Code and work with applicants and agents to ensure designs will deliver safe, quality buildings.
Given the high level of non-compliance shown in the monitoring data, it is an achievement that the number of additional delays is less than a month. In fact, across all 66 BCAs, the median processing time for applications is nine days – well within the 20-day statutory timeframe.
Admittedly, we are in a low building cycle, so the number of consent applications is down. However, as Branz research set out in ModelDocs: Transforming Building Consenting Behaviour for Better Housing (2024) has identified, it is submitter response times to RFIs that create the delays.
The minister should be concerned by the fact that the top 10 RFIs in the latest monitoring data are dominated by structure and moisture clauses - critical to a building’s structural integrity and weather-tightness.
Let’s not have another leaky building crisis.
There are also failed inspections – the top three being final, framing and pre-line – all requiring reinspections. These high non-compliance and failure rates add costs to the building owner.
The minister is proposing bold regulatory reforms designed to speed up processing times and streamline inspections, and ultimately deliver on New Zealand’s housing needs. Boinz supports this in principle - housing affordability, availability - and consistent and efficient systems and processes that protect building owners and occupiers.
However, we do not support a response that targets a system designed to safeguard those investing in and occupying buildings.
Let’s look at where the problem is and not be hoodwinked by lobby groups with self-interest agendas. The fundamental issue that continues to plague the sector is the high number of people working in it who do not have adequate skills and are not under supervision.
New Zealand has around 31,000 licensed building practitioners (LBPs), the government scheme designed to encourage competent building practitioners to build homes right the first time.
Meanwhile, there are at least another 70,000 plus operators who are not registered or certified. That is very scary. Boinz wants to see only qualified, certified builders working in the sector.
It should be noted that the latest Licensed Building Practitioners’ annual report states that LBPs are relying on building consent authorities for quality control. If the Government’s own watchdog has identified this reliance as an issue, why isn’t the minister looking at it?
So, our consenting system is not perfect, but it is certainly not broken. It’s comparable with the top 10 countries in the world for speed and ease of understanding of the rules. The reforms being proposed are progressive and in the right environment would be appropriate. But we still have too many cowboys out there.
We want to work with Minister Penk on solutions. It makes sense to improve application inputs and readiness for inspection to assist consent authorities and building owners to achieve a more efficient and streamlined process with reduced costs – whilst maintaining the quality that all building owners and users deserve.
Technology can also help make the application process clearer and easier for the applicant. But all stakeholders need to step up and play their part in the process.
Let’s not go back to leaky buildings and costly failures that can affect our mums and dads, our families, and those that don’t have the skill sets to understand what is wrong.
Let’s acknowledge the regulatory rigour our building surveyors are providing to ensure that New Zealand building owners and users are protected and that our built environment is a safe place to live, work and play by certifying code compliant designs.
Getting it right at the start is a mantra that the sector needs to adopt.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360636817/sorting-out-building-consenting-means-rounding-cowboys
