Mayors urge Govt to boost offer on $20b leak-repair costs

Metro-city mayors yesterday pleaded for the Government to take more responsibility for the leaky homes disaster.

Andrew Williams of North Shore City rejected the Government's 10 per cent contribution offer to victims, which could amount to $777 million by 2034.

He and the mayors of Auckland City, Waitakere, Wellington, Christchurch and Tauranga held a teleconference yesterday to nut out a new proposal.

They are demanding the Government share more responsibility and start paying directly for a crisis that will cost up to $20 billion to fix.

Mr Williams wants the Government to at least match the 26 per cent repairs contribution that councils will make. Homeowning victims are to pay 64 per cent.

The 64/26/10 deal came from Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson's office in the last week and is the first time this decade that any Government has offered to make a direct financial contribution to the rotting-homes crisis.

The state's role so far has been regulation of the sector, reforms to the building code and introduction of the Weathertight Homes Tribunal and the Weathertightness Services.

Mr Williams rejected the Government's proposal and said it needed to significantly increase its contribution to the leaky homes rescue package.

The mayors want to meet the Prime Minister to get some action on the crisis, Mr Williams said after none of the mayors backed the proposal from Mr Williamson.

So the civic leaders will arm themselves with more information from their council officials and seek a meeting with John Key and Mr Williamson in the hope of getting a better deal.

They want the Government to match council contributions to the rotting-homes disaster.

Mr Williams said whether it was 20 per cent or 30 per cent from both parties, the state had to match council payments.

Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey warned that there would be no quick fix to the crisis and it would take some time to reach agreement.

Mr Williams blamed the building and construction industry, which he said should share a larger part of the blame.

That sector had lobbied for the use of substandard materials.

"It has also designed and built these homes, and shoddy workmanship, bad design and poor building systems are acknowledged as major factors in leaky homes. Yet the industry has cleverly avoided making any contribution to the Government's proposed leaky homes rescue package," Mr Williams said.

"Councils are in the gun for the bulk of repair-cost negotiated settlements under the 'last man standing' principle, because many of the developers and builders have either collapsed their companies or have gone broke. So ratepayers are picking up the tab."

He praised Mr Key and Mr Williamson for fronting up with a contribution.

"However, their 10 per cent is not sufficient to cover both the moral responsibility of central government for the failings of deregulating the building code and also to cover the socialised debt to leaky-home owners of the building and construction industry."