In August 2017 the Building Ministers’ Forum (BMF) asked Professor Peter Shergold and Ms. Bronwyn Weir to undertake an assessment of the effectiveness of compliance and enforcement systems for the building and construction industry across Australia.

The goal of the report was to “enhance public trust through effective implementation of building and construction standards that protect the interests of those who own, work, live, or conduct their business in Australian buildings.”

The final Shergold-Weir report published on 27 April 2018 and explored aspects of the National Construction Code and national consistency in building administration throughout the state. A number of recommendations about the process of building and maintaining safe and well-constructed buildings were made. Master Builders’ national office will make a submission to the report working to ensure alignment among member states.

However, after consultation with its Sector policy committees, Master Builders Victoria has chosen to respond independently to the report as well. Making a Victorian submission was motivated by several reasons, Master Builders Victoria CEO Radley de Silva said:

“There’s some unique Victorian points we felt we needed to make in response to the report. We have just had significant legislative reform in Victoria and many of those changes already align with recommendations in the Shergold-Weir report itself. Victoria has addressed a number of concerns raised in the report and some reflect long term lobbying positions we hold.”

But Mr de Silva says there is a related factor at play here, which is that Master Builders in Victoria have already experienced significant change and cost for builders by introducing the new Victorian system. It would be inequitable to force them to go through more change again.

“There’s an element here to ensure our members are protected. One year into a new system, we are not prepared to put members through another potential round of major changes to processes, certification and registration systems where the net benefit might be zero. It wouldn’t be palatable for us to have new laws mandated onto our industry at this time.”

In its submission, Master Builders states a strong preference to work toward national principles or benchmarks to achieve closer alignment among states without creating friction points or road blocks. The report itself acknowledges that a one-size-fits-all solution for the building industry is not optimal.

Other responses from Master Builders agreed with proposals for mandatory trades registration and CPD, building consistent national databases for building standards and reference materials.

Of interest, the commentary also notes that the current pressures on surveyors and others with accountability in the current building certification process are increasing. We believe the entire certification process from beginning to end needs to be based on a chain of reliance among skilled building professionals relying on each other’s professional assessments and mutual assurance.

You can find our full response to the report here, and the report itself here.