It is said that a Royal Commission is never appointed unless the outcome is known. Whether that's true or not, to expect the Christchurch Earthquake Commission to apportion blame for building failures is both unfair to them and dangerous to the recovery.
1. It will be virtually impossible to determine the cause of a failure. It could be any one or a combination of: design, regulations, consent checking, construction, supervision.
New Zealand, along with Japan, California and other jurisdictions, has very effective earthquake regulations. We also have a very active Earthquake Engineering Society that brings the best skills together. I have confidence in them - and would be sory to see their initiatives and commitment submerged by overlayed regulatory systems.
2. Trying to lay blame will inevitably result in litigation. And given the problematic nature of any attempted decision, this will do little more than feed the lawyers.
3. It will also delay the recovery process as particpants avoid any action that might incurr similar responses. In our punitive system of joint and several liabilty, industry participants are becoming extremely 'gun shy' of anything that might expose them to claims.
The Commission could contribute valuable oversights resulting from 'new eyes' surveying a situation that many countries have faced. The danger is that their deliberations will result in an increased prescriptive regulatory regime that Local Government does not have the skills to administer. So once again (like the Leaky Homes crisis), we will have bureaucratic delays that will frustrate the important recovery process.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment