Member log in

Consenting blowtorch focuses on Marryatt

The Insurance Council and Property Council have weighed in against Christchurch City Council’s consenting failure.

Their contribution comes as Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee meets mayor Bob Parker and council chief executive Tony Marryatt.

The blowtorch is moving in Mr Marryatt’s direction as the Insurance Council raises questions about legality and liability of consents issued in recent years.

Business leaders are raising the issue of whether senior staff at the council should resign.

The International Accreditation New Zealand has announced the withdrawal of accreditation for the council to be a Building Consent Authority and has revealed that problems were identified as far back as 2007.

But Mr Brownlee says there is no question of a moratorium because of the urgency of the post-earthquake rebuild.

The failure of council consenting is a heaven-sent opportunity for insurers to deflect attention away from their own shortcomings and to sheet future blame for shoddy building back at the council.

MORE TO COME

c.hutch@clear.net.nz

More by Chris Hutching

Comments and questions
9

It is important to keep the CCC's long-term and well-known systemic failures (building consents being just one part of it) from EQC / insurance sector shortcomings / failures.

It should be abundantly clear by now, that there needs to be a massive sort out of the CCC. It is a massive impediment to the recovery and has been since the first earthquake events 4 September 2010 ... refer "Christchurch: The way forward" (Google search).

Let the blame game begin. All residents want is confidence that the system delivers outcomes that are consistent with modern-day standards.

Then the best position that any resident could take is to work with, and rely on, professionals of their chosing who can assist them achieving any standards, including modern day ones.

Why do we need beauracrats in the middle of this?

The buck stops at the top. Time for Tony to be fired.

Given the roll call of failures, in any private sector business the CEO would have been replaced by now. What is the hold-up? The probable cost of retention - i.e., more failures, will be significantly greater than the cost of replacement.

Surely such a controversial CEO under these circumstances can be guided to consider whether he has been spending enough time with his family of late?

Mr Marryatt is at this moment sorting through his gardening tools, they are about to get some serious use 7 days a week.

He's already pottering about in his garden shed? That was a very quick trip back to Hamilton!

I'm sceptical that designs that pose health or safety risks have been submitted and approved. Everyone involved from the architect to the drainlayer has to sign up to responsibility to their work nowadays.

It's possible the anal details of the building code have not been religiously applied. It's likely that the consequences of this are entirely negligible. Without details proving otherwise it is foolish to leap to conclusions.