20 years ago:
• The New Zealand Master Builders Federation was seeking urgent meetings with the Government to request that it act to free up timber supplies.
There had been no let-up in the crisis over continually increasing timber prices and shortage of timber for domestic use, the reason for which was unclear at the time.
However, it was thought that congestion occurring somewhere along the supply chain might be resulting in the New Zealand domestic market being substantially under-supplied.
15 years ago:
• The need for a revamp of the structure of the Registered Master Builders Federation was raised in a discussion paper which suggested that the existence of 22 associations “appears something of an extravagance”.
Written by Taranaki Registered Master Builders Association secretary Ken Martin, the paper was to be considered by the RMBF’s marketing committee as part of an overall strategic planning exercise.
Mr Martin asked whether 22 separate associations were “a luxury we can afford”, pointing out that most served very small memberships.
He said options included amalgamating associations on a regional basis or operating from one office in Wellington, although amalgamation would not correct “what is essentially an outmoded system which has served us well but has been overtaken by modern demands”.
He said the rapidly-changing, electronically-driven world had made available previously undreamed of tools — “couriers and fastpost could deliver overnight to virtually anywhere in the country, and fax machines spat out messages within seconds, whether the recipient was in Invercargill or Kaitaia”.
10 years ago:
• The RMBF supported the Government’s move to strengthen the role of the regulator within the construction industry. Chief executive Chris Preston said the Federation felt it was important to have a regulator that was able to push the pause button if something in the industry appeared to be going astray — as was the case with the leaky buildings crisis.
5 years ago:
• Open Polytechnic tutor Leigh Thomson posed the question concerning leaky buildings litigation, asking whether statutory insurance — of the type that operated in Queensland, Australia — was the answer to avoiding legal battles surrounding weathertightness issues.
