Editorial: Message is clear: fix the rot

There was no shortage of irony in the National Party's calling of a public meeting in Auckland yesterday to discuss the subject of leaking and rotten buildings. First, it was a little perverse of the party to try to make the public running on a problem whose genesis is being traced back to regulatory changes made when it was in power. Secondly, it was highlighting the issue of liability when part of the burden may fall directly on the state.

Internal Affairs Minister George Hawkins, in a remarkably inept series of statements last week, finally conceded the need for some sort of inquiry but limited it to a select committee process. He was at some pains not to include in its terms of reference the matter of liability. To be fair, the committee has the ability to inquire into any other matters it deems necessary, but the minister has given a steer. And that steer is clearly away from dropping the Government in it.

Liability sends a shiver down the spines of bureaucrats and politicians and is, without doubt, behind a hesitation on the part of regulators and industry bodies alike to prescribe remedies to the problem of houses that leak then rot. Their worry is that, having stated what is necessary to prevent the problem, they will be liable if those measures fail to fix it. In all likelihood that is why the building code is now woefully lacking in detail on how a building should be made weatherproof.

Over many months the Heraldhas documented case after case of rotting buildings. Public exposure has brought the issue to a head but resolution is by no means assured. It should be. The evidence is irrefutable, the number of affected homeowners has reached crisis proportions and the need for immediate preventive measures is obvious.

What is extraordinary is the fact that there were clear warning signs overseas of the dangers that the building methods of the past decade have presented.

The Barrett Commission in British Columbia carried out two inquiries that resulted in the damnation of building methods that mirror those in New Zealand. Commissioner David Barrett described the situation as "a human tragedy - a silent and prolonged disaster". His comment needs to be seen against the devastating fall in the value of affected properties in his province which, thankfully, has not been matched here. However, it does not over-dramatise the situation to describe what is happening in New Zealand as a disaster.

Why did it take investigation by this newspaper and the uncovering of numerous examples of decay and compromised safety before the problem was acknowledged by developers, the building industry and authorities? Why was the Herald accused of "scaremongering" when there was clear international evidence of a widespread problem? Delay in coming to terms with the scale of the problem can only have made matters worse.

In Canada, many apartment owners were faced with financial hardship - even bankruptcy - when the cost of repairs eventually fell on their shoulders. Homeowners here are now banding together to seek some form of financial protection from the same unenviable outcome. Hence the issue of liability is something that will not go away.

Nevertheless, the Government must be motivated to find solutions rather than be haunted by the spectre of contingent liability. The country is confronted by a serious problem and, unless measures are taken, it has the potential to grow to the point where Commissioner Barrett's description of Canada's plight will be a reality here. The message to Mr Hawkins is clear: fix it.

* If you have information about leaking buildings,
email the Herald or fax (09) 373-6421.

Further reading
Feature: Leaky buildings

Related links