Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]

BUILDING AMENDMENT (OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATION) BILL 2016

BUILDING AMENDMENT (OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATION) BILL
(Serial 152)

Bill presented and read a first time.

Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to amend the Building Act to create two new tiers of occupancy certification in addition to the existing occupancy permit, and to enable occupancy certification to be issued on an expired building permit.

Buildings in the Northern Territory generally reflect the regulations and building standards of their time. Anyone familiar with building control in the Northern Territory will know that legislation has evolved and has been enhanced throughout the years. Regulated building areas have also expanded as the population increased.

In the past, Commonwealth ordinance regulated the construction of buildings. After Darwin was destroyed by Cyclone Tracy in 1974, buildings had to comply with higher wind code standards. Shortly after self-government, in 1983, the Northern Territory Building Act was introduced and buildings were constructed in accordance with the NT Building Code. This was suspended by the 1993 Building Act, which created private certification and adopted the national construction code. This is the system that exists today.

In 2006 when the Northern Territory, and especially Darwin, was on the brink of significant development, requirements for certification were tightened to require additional documentation and inspections to cover critical stages of building work. The basis for the issue of an occupancy permit was also amended to require full compliance with the requirements of the act and regulations.

A more robust regulatory environment, however, created an inflexible certification system. As a result impasses occur when the requirements of the act and regulations are not met in full. For example, if there are unapproved variations and the building permit has expired, a new permit is needed. If by this time technical standards have changed, the building must be upgraded. It is also unlikely for a certifier to complete certification if all the prescribed conditions and requirements have not been fulfilled.

As an occupancy permit is the only mechanism for certification, there are building works that may comply with the relevant technical standards but cannot be lawfully occupied because the legislative requirements have not been complied with in full. There is also a culture of non-compliance and, anecdotally, it is understood that there are many unapproved works and works that do not comply with relevant technical standards. In addition, the public is generally unaware of their obligations and the enforcement of regulations has been inadequate.

Since a moratorium was declared in 2009 there has been a focus on reducing the thousands of building permits that have been lodged but not finalised by an occupancy permit. To this date, many of these building matters remain unresolved.

The proposed amendments to the act are in response to calls from building owners and industry for a practical resolution to finalise outstanding certification. When the proposal to create alternative pathways to certification was discussed in 2014, there was a positive reaction overall as it presented an opportunity for certification impasses to be finalised and for buildings to be lawfully occupied. In addition there was going to be recourse for existing unapproved building works to apply for certification. At the same time there was recognition that the existing building matters must not be resolved in any way that compromises building standards and public safety. The amendments require that in relation to all categories of occupancy certification the building works must be suitable for occupation, otherwise the works cannot be occupied and enforcement action may commence.

The bill will introduce two new alternative pathways for certification. The works covered by a building permit the certifier will consider the relevant building legislation and standards that were in force at the time of the permit. If all of the conditions and requirements for an occupancy permit are not fulfilled, the building owner will have the ability to seek certification by applying for a Certificate of Substantial Compliance. The certifier must, however, be satisfied that the works comply with all relevant technical standards and were completed under a valid building permit.

If the certifier is unable to determine that works meet the criteria for a Certificate of Substantial Compliance, the owner may apply for a Certificate of Existence. An application for this certificate may also be made if works are unapproved. The bill enables the issue of a Certificate of Existence by the Director of Building Control on recommendation by a certifier. The certifier must assess that the building works comply with a reasonable level of safety, health and amenity. It is intended that the Director of Building Control will issue guidelines under section 167(b) of the Building Act that will describe what is considered a reasonable level of safety, health and amenity.

Certificates of Existence cannot be issued for hospitals, schools, emergency shelters and any other high-risk buildings and essential facilities. This category of certification will also only apply to buildings completed before the amending legislation has commenced, as it has been specifically created to address legacy building issues.

The bill also inserts a provision that makes it clear that occupancy certification can be issued if the building permit has expired.

I expect building owners to welcome these amendments as it introduces some flexibility within the current certification system in order to resolve certification impasses without compromising its integrity. The integrity of the building certification system will not be compromised, as at present unapproved building works have not undergone any form of assessment. By introducing a mechanism whereby the work can be assessed and determined to be suitable for occupancy, public safety is expected to be enhanced.

Once these amendments are in place, an effective enforcement regime is necessary to ensure ongoing compliance. At least, initially, there will be a focus on facilitating compliance, not active enforcement. Building owners and industry will be given reasonable time to manage the new system from an administrative point of view. It is, however, expected that owners of buildings that have reached an impasse initiate the certification process once the new system is in place. If a building owner refuses to obtain certification enforcement action may commence.

These amendments will achieve the right balance between regulatory compliance, public safety and pragmatism. The new system recognises that unavoidable events occur during construction. While there is now a practical mechanism to deal with these events, the different occupancy certifications will reflect the true level of compliance achieved by buildings, and creates an incentive for people to do the right thing. This creates transparency, increases confidence in property transactions and enhances consumer protection. With better information, potential buyers are likely to price the true value of a property. This, in return, is expected to encourage owners to comply with certification requirements in order to achieve the highest level of occupancy certification, and therefore price for their properties.

Madam Speaker, I commend this bill to honourable members and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill

 

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]