6 Sep, 2017

The Australian Institute of Architects fully supports all of the recommendations put forward by the Senate Economics References Committee inquiry into non-conforming building products in their interim report on aluminium composite cladding tabled today.

National President Richard Kirk said the Institute shares the Committee’s view that the use of non-conforming and non-compliant building products represents a very real and present threat to the community.
 
‘Ensuring public safety in the built environment is the chief priority of the architectural profession,’ Kirk said.

‘We support the Committee’s call for further urgent action to address the danger to our community posed by the de-professionalisation of building procurement over many years now.

‘As our cities become increasingly dense, and our buildings more complex, it is essential that those within industry become more – not less – skilled and qualified and their work subject to appropriately stringent checks and certification.

‘Architects already have, and maintain, a level of qualification, expertise and conduct codes of practice, as well as continuing professional development requirements, that exceed those of other professions within the building sector.

‘We believe the bar should be raised across the board with increased transparency and accountability for all participants throughout the vast and complex supply and construction chains.
 
‘The built environment is an area where regulation is not only appropriate but necessary. Cutting red tape cannot and should not come at the expense of people’s safety.

‘We want to see compliance and enforcement mechanisms strengthened across jurisdictions to properly protect all Australians in their homes, workplaces and in our public spaces.

‘As we have said, and the Committee has recommended, non-compliance must be punished with substantial fines and other penalties.’

Chief Executive Officer Jennifer Cunich said the Senate Committee had considered the evidence and recommended solutions the Institute had put forward.

‘The recommendations, if implemented, will go a long way to addressing many of the issues that architects have identified over an extended period,’ Cunich said.

‘We have called for improved measures to manage the risks posed by non-conforming and non-complying building products now and into the future.

‘Unlike other building practitioners, an architect who is a member of the Institute is professionally qualified with a minimum of five years’ study of an accredited university program, mandatory practical experience and a registration exam, legally registered to practice by State Registration Boards and bound by a code of conduct established by Institute.

‘We welcome the Committee’s adoption of our recommendation to establish a national licensing scheme, with requirements for continued professional development for all building practitioners.

‘The Institute has been supportive of the various measures being taken by State and Territory governments, as well as the work being coordinated by the Commonwealth through the Building Ministers Forum, but equally we have highlighted that there are some gaps and inconsistencies in the actions being taken by various jurisdictions that must be addressed.’

Message from the National President

As specialist, highly-qualified, registered professionals, architects have specific obligations and duties when it comes to product specification and use in the built environment. Beyond the regulations imposed by government, the Institute’s members are also bound by a code of ethics, and by a duty to constantly improve our practices. This commitment to excellence underpins our social licence to operate and the trust our clients, and the broader community, place in the profession. 
 
Cognisant of these responsibilities, in the wake of the Grenfell fire tragedy in London and subsequent Australian federal, state and territory government actions in response, the Institute’s National Practice Committee has produced a new Advisory Note for members on non-conforming building products and non-complying products. 
 
We urge you to take the time to review this important information, which will shortly be followed by a Practice Note currently under development by the Acumen Content Review Panel. You can download the full Advisory Note here. 
 
All building work in Australia must meet certain performance and legal requirements to ensure it is safe, healthy and durable.  In recent years concerns have been raised about the risks of using non-conforming building products (NCBPs), or using non-complying products (NCPs). There are particular concerns around the health and safety risks associated with the use of NCBPs and NCPs.  With particular reference to flammable cladding, these represent a clear and unacceptable threat to public safety. This year’s Grenfell Tower fire tragedy in the UK showed the lethal risks of non-conforming products. 
 
Building audits currently underway by state and territory governments, including the one that commenced in Victoria following the 2014 Lacrosse fire, clearly demonstrate this is an issue – and a danger – we must urgently address in Australia. 
 
The Institute is engaging with government and advocating strongly for improved measures to manage the risks posed by NCBPs and NCPs now and into the future. 
 
We are urging decision makers to recognise the role architects are uniquely qualified and placed to play in ensuring better public safety in our built environment. 
 
We welcome the measures governments at all levels have taken to date acting to address the urgent public safety issue NCBPs and NCPs but more is needed. 
 
The Senate Standing Committee on Economics’ inquiry into non-conforming building products has held five public hearings this year and received 87 submissions – including ours which you can read here. 

Next Wednesday the Committee is due to release their Interim report on external cladding materials with the interim report on asbestos due for release in October and the final report on both in April next year. We will circulate the Committees’ interim report to members once it is released. 
 
Your Institute’s position
1.    The threat of non-conforming and non-compliant building products can be reduced at every stage of the supply and building process.
2.    Rigorous enforcement of existing laws, including more stringent examination of overseas certification and third-party evaluation of locally produced materials, can ensure that a product is what it is represented to be, with consistent performance.   
3.    Traditionally, architects were the final arbiters of material selection. Decisions are now made by builders, project managers, and others to substitute products to save costs, with the decision being based on materials that ‘look the same’ rather than ‘perform the same’ as that originally selected by the architect designer.
4.    With reduced levels of oversight by skilled and experienced practitioners, inappropriate use and substitution of building products can result in low quality and often dangerous buildings.
5.    The Institute will push to realign decision making responsibilities with expertise. We will push for stringent enforcement of the building code and proper oversight. We will closely monitor government action and reforms to ensure our members are well informed. 
 
Together, we will continue to advocate for high quality, safe and durable buildings to our community that architects are well-placed to deliver.
 

Richard Kirk,
National President,
Australian Institute of Architects
 

Photo credit:  Toby Scott