Officials have launched a new review of building product quality controls, two years after their previous such review went nowhere.
Documents released under the Official Information Act (OIA) show the previous review generated a single, three-page document , and a meeting between Building Minister Nick Smith and his officials at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment in June 2017.
"No decisions were made by the minister following this meeting. No further advice was sought before the 2017 election," the OIA response said.
The ministry had no estimate of what it had spent on the review of the building product assurance system.
The three-page document the ministry produced, said: "MBIE is constrained by a lack of powers to investigate product issues ... MBIE is at the early stages of understanding problems with building products."
A new review has been commissioned and would last 18 months, MBIE said.
"Reliable and fit-for-purpose building products are central to the safety, durability and affordability of buildings," the ministry said in the OIA response.
At the end of 2017, the ministry added 40 extra positions at its building regulation unit.
Bruce Kohn of the Building Industry Federation, which represents product suppliers, laughed when he heard about the new review as his group had presented on reform to various governments.
It had suggested a change to the law to require manufacturers and suppliers of building products to label products as compliant to the Building Code.
"A number do and some don't. We're in that situation because nobody has bothered to change the law since we drew it to the attention of the authorities."
The previous minister Dr Smith sent the federation's paper to his officials over two years ago, Mr Kohn said.
In April 2016, Dr smith had been prompted on a flawed steel mesh testing. That culminated in Steel and Tube appearing last Friday in the Auckland District Court for misleading consumers. The prosecution has called for a $3 million fine and the court has reserved its decision.
"The question for me is where are their products that are required to meet particular standards that are sufficiently important to the building, that you would require independent verification that they meet that standard?" Dr Smith told RNZ in April 2016.
"That's why I want the ministry to explore not just steel mesh, but more broadly, what are the requirements for independent verification."
Resistance to reform
The building product assurance system has resisted reform.
However, in Australia, which like New Zealand has a performance-based building Act, reviews have recently led to changes to try to keep out dodgy products.
Issues around seismic steel mesh here were eventually sorted out with many more labs gaining accreditation, boosting the industry's capacity to test and track problems.
Not so with other types of steel.
Wellington builder Michael Harper has been caught out by weak steel reinforcing bar that's led to months of wrangling over a new home he's building on the city's south coast.
Euro Corporation admitted it had supplied substandard steel to Mr Harper, though it said it was a manufacturing mistake at a Malaysian factory involving a "tiny amount".
The Commerce Commission is still investigating.
"We took a truckload of steel to MBIE to get tested. They threw us out of the building," Mr Harper said.
"Went to [building research body] Branz, they wouldn't look at it. We went to building and housing, Nick Smith, he didn't want to know.
"We learnt the government doesn't want to know; they're not here to look after our interests, they're here to look after their own."
A Euro Corporation spokesperson said it had made "extraordinary" efforts to help Mr Harper "far beyond any potential legal liability" and had made a "generous and comprehensive" offer.
- By Phil Pennington
SHARE ME