Breadcrumbs
Home ›-
Building and construction consultations
-
Work with engineered stone and materials containing crystalline silica
- Minister's foreword
- Executive summary
- Introduction
- Current risk requirements
- Problem definition
- Options for working with engineered stone and materials containing crystalline silica
- Closing remarks
- Summary of all consultation questions
- Glossary
- Annex I: Silicosis and engineered stone background
- Annex II: Overview of the health and safety regulatory regime
- Annex III: Revised Workplace Exposure Standard
- Annex IV: Further information on the status quo
- Annex V: Australia’s amendments to its regulatory settings in response to the risks posed by RCS
- Making it easier to build granny flats (2024)
- Building Code fire safety review discussion document
-
Summary of submissions: Building Code fire safety review
- Executive summary
- Submitters
- Outcomes of the fire safety review
- Effectiveness of fire safety measures in the Building Code
- Keeping pace with new technologies and new fire challenges
- Certainty, clarity, and consistency
- Suggested priorities
- Contributing issues from the background paper
- Other comments
- Appendix A: List of submitters
- Appendix B: Comments related to individual outcomes and issues
- Summary of submissions: Improving efficiency in the inspection process
- Review of the building consent system (snapshot)
- Proposed amendments to the BuiltReady Scheme Rules public consultation
-
Building consent system review: Options paper summary of submissions
- Introduction
- Key themes from submissions
- Promoting competition in the building regulatory system
- Removing impediments to product substitution and variation
- Strengthening roles and responsibilities
- New assurance pathways
- More efficient and streamlined delivery of building consent services
- Better performance monitoring and system stewardship
- Better responding to the needs and aspirations of Māori
- Addressing the interface between the building and resource consent system
- Submitter details
-
Improving efficiency in the inspection process: Discussion document
- Use of information
- Minister's foreword
- Introduction
- Increasing the uptake of remote inspections
- Section one: Options to increase the uptake of remote inspections and improve efficiency of inspection processes
- Section two: Increasing inspection capacity through the use of Accredited Organisations (Building)
- Appendix one: Full list of consultation questions
- Appendix two: Summary of options for feedback
-
Consultation document: Insulation requirements in housing and other buildings
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Insulation in housing and small buildings
- 3. Insulation in large buildings
- Appendix A: Proposed changes to Acceptable Solution H1/AS1 Energy Efficiency for all housing, and bu
- Appendix B: Proposed changes to Verification Method H1/VM1 Energy Efficiency for all housing, and buildings up to 300m squared
- Appendix C: Proposed changes to Acceptable Solution H1/AS2 Energy Efficiency for buildings greater than 300m squared
- Appendix D: Proposed changes to Verification Method H1/VM2 Energy Efficiency for buildings greater than 300m squared
-
Work with engineered stone and materials containing crystalline silica
Suggested priorities
We asked what issues should be prioritised in the review, and submitters most often called for greater clarity and consistency, better protection for at-risk building users, and clearer requirements aligned to risk.
On this page
General question about priorities
The consultation included one general question on the priorities.
14. What do you think are the most important issues MBIE should consider in the review?
Priority of outcomes
As a free-from question, respondents provided varying levels of detail and descriptions on what they thought the priorities of the review should be. These responses were analysed by their connection to the key issues and statements in the discussion document. Further analysis of the responses in relation to individual issues in presented in the next section of this document.
Table 6.1: Number of submissions suggestion priorities for each issue statement
| Issue statement | Number of submissions | Percentage of submissions |
|---|---|---|
| No answer | 42 | 38% |
| Certainty, clarity and consistency | 32 | 29% |
| 4. Certainty, clarity and consistency, general | 13 | 12% |
| 4.3 Unclear language leads to inconsistent decision making | 10 | 9% |
| 4.4 Inconsistencies when also complying with other legislation and regulations | 4 | 4% |
| 4.2 Multiple building classifications make requirements unclear | 3 | 3% |
| 4.1 Gaps in regulation have created a complex Building Code system to use | 2 | 2% |
| Effectiveness of fire safety measures in the Building Code | 28 | 25% |
| 2.1 People in some type of buildings can be at greater risk in a fire | 11 | 10% |
| 2.2 Requirements are not always set at the right fire risk level for different types of buildings | 11 | 10% |
| 2.4 Emergency response needs to be considered in more detail | 3 | 3% |
| 2.5 Maintaining fire safety over the life of a building can be a challenge | 3 | 3% |
| Keeping pace with new technologies and new fire challenges | 10 | 9% |
| 3.2 The Building Code has not kept pace with modern construction methods | 5 | 4% |
| 3. Keeping pace with new technologies and new fire challenges, general | 2 | 2% |
| 3.1 The fire safety provisions create barriers to using overseas products | 2 | 2% |
| 3.5 Barriers to using newer fire safety systems | 1 | 1% |
Of those who provided a response, most (12%) stated that more certainty, clarity and consistency was needed in general. Ensuring people in certain buildings are not at greater risk (10%), and ensuring requirements are set at the right risk level (10%) were next most mentioned, followed by using clear language to enable consistent decision making (9%).
A few considered the Building Code is not keeping up with modern construction methods (4%) as a priority and inconsistencies when complying with other regulations (4%). Multiple building classifications (3%), emergency response (3%) and fire safety over the life cycle of a building (3%), keeping pace with new technologies (2%), barriers to overseas products (2%), the complexity of the Building Code system due to gaps in regulation (2%), and one submitter stated that barriers to new fire safety systems be removed (1%).
The responses to the questions on specific issues in the other sections suggested that clarity, consistency and continuity, building classifications and maintenance of existing buildings (including Change the Use) would have been the top three priorities.
Many submitters mentioned more than one priority. Fire hazards from new technology and fire safety provisions for modern house construction were mentioned by a 1 or 2 submitters but not as the most important issue to address first. The issue no one specifically mentioned as a priority is the focus of the Building Code on life safety and protection of the building.
“In my opinion the largest area of concern in the New Zealand Building Code (NZBC) Fire Safety clauses and the means of compliance published by the Ministry of Building, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) is the inconsistent treatment of risk, in particular with regard to sleeping occupancies.”
“Consistency in Regulations Address gaps to ensure clear, unified guidelines and prevent varied interpretations.”
“The most important issue MBIE should consider in the review is the need to recognise proven, effective technologies that can enhance the safety of New Zealanders.”