Major commercial projects could gain a unified national consenting process, with producer statements signed by qualified engineers receiving legal recognition and residential consenting also potentially becoming more efficient.
New Zealand’s building consent system could be heading for one of its most significant reforms in recent years.
On 15 July, the National Party announced that, if re-elected, it would introduce a series of building consent reforms. These include establishing a national Building Consent Authority to handle consenting for major commercial building projects, and giving qualified engineers greater sign-off powers by granting formal legal status to compliant producer statements. National says it hopes to reduce cumbersome consenting procedures, shorten construction timelines, lower development costs and further improve construction efficiency across New Zealand.
Two reforms target consenting problems
Currently, the vast majority of building projects in New Zealand require a building consent from the local council to confirm that the work meets the safety and quality requirements of the Building Act and Building Code.
However, the construction industry has long reported differences in consenting standards and efficiency between councils. Some large or complex projects must also wait for appropriately qualified assessors, often extending approval times and adding to developers’ and investors’ time costs and financial pressures.
National’s building and construction spokesperson Chris Penk said the industry had long faced slow and costly consenting, with these problems already affecting commercial investment and housing construction.
National has therefore proposed two core reforms aimed at improving consenting efficiency through changes to the system.
Establishing a national Building Consent Authority
Under National’s plan, a new Building Consent Authority, or BCA, would provide a unified consenting channel for major commercial building projects.
The authority is expected primarily to handle consents for buildings of four or more storeys, or large buildings accommodating more than 500 people, such as major office buildings, hotels, hospitals, shopping centres, apartments and other large public buildings.
Chris Penk said complex projects would no longer depend on whether a particular local council happened to have assessors with the relevant expertise. Instead, a national team with specialist capabilities would handle them.
He said this would establish nationally consistent consenting standards for major projects while freeing up local council resources to focus on residential and general building consents, helping more New Zealand families build or renovate.
National says the new authority would provide another option for major commercial building consents, while councils would retain their roles as building consent authorities. Developers could still choose to apply to their local council as needed.
Engineers’ sign-offs would gain legal recognition
Another closely watched reform would strengthen the legal status of producer statements.
Producer statements are usually issued by professionals such as registered structural engineers and fire engineers to confirm that particular designs or construction work comply with the Building Code. They are already widely used in the construction industry, but have no formal legal status under the Building Act, resulting in inconsistent acceptance criteria among councils.
To reduce their exposure to legal liability, many councils reassess work or even arrange further inspections despite receiving statements signed by professional engineers. This duplicates scrutiny and adds time and costs to projects.
National plans to amend the relevant rules so that building consent authorities must recognise the legal effect of producer statements signed by suitably qualified professionals and meeting government standards. Authorities would no longer be allowed to reassess the same matters because of liability concerns.
Chris Penk said the reform would reduce duplicate inspections and improve consenting efficiency, while ensuring professionals take responsibility commensurate with their qualifications.
Why pursue this reform?
New Zealand’s construction industry has faced continuing challenges in recent years, including rising labour, material and financing costs. Consenting efficiency has also remained a focus for developers, construction companies and industry organisations.
National argues that the current consenting system is excessively cumbersome, slowing commercial construction and increasing overall development costs, ultimately affecting housing supply, commercial investment and economic development.
Since taking office, National has introduced a series of construction reforms, including allowing more overseas building products into the New Zealand market, speeding up building inspections, improving the building liability framework, adjusting some earthquake-related building rules and advancing reforms to granny flat construction policy.
The proposed national Building Consent Authority and formal legal recognition of producer statements are seen as another important step towards modernising building consenting.
The new consenting model for major commercial buildings would also draw on the Supermarket Building Consent Service introduced by the government last year, aiming to improve efficiency and national consistency by having a specialist body handle complex projects centrally.
What effects could the reform have?
The industry generally believes major commercial developments could be the biggest beneficiaries if the policies are successfully implemented.
A unified national consenting process could reduce inconsistencies between regions, shorten waiting times for major projects and improve investment certainty, helping commercial properties, office buildings, hotels, retail centres and public buildings proceed more quickly.
With large, complex projects handled by a specialist authority, local councils could devote more staff to consents for homes, extensions and renovations. In theory, this could also make building consent applications more efficient for ordinary households.
Professional engineers would also play a greater role in building consenting. National’s plan to give producer statements formal legal status would lend greater authority to professional opinions while requiring engineers to shoulder greater professional responsibility.
However, some argue that whether the reform achieves its intended results will depend on how the new authority operates, and how the government ensures that improved consenting efficiency does not compromise building quality, safety standards or the allocation of responsibility.
Observations and reflections
Building consent efficiency has long been seen as an important influence on New Zealand’s housing supply, commercial investment and infrastructure construction. National’s proposed reform goes beyond simplifying the process: it seeks to redefine responsibilities between local councils and specialist bodies, and further strengthen professional engineers’ role within the consenting system.
If the policies are implemented, New Zealand’s building consent model could gradually move from its traditional reliance on local councils towards a more specialised, standardised and nationally unified approach. For developers, faster and clearer consenting could shorten construction timelines and lower financing and holding costs. For households building or renovating, consenting could also become more efficient if councils can free up more resources for residential projects.
Of course, every reform brings new challenges. Questions warranting continued attention include how to improve consenting efficiency while ensuring building quality, safety standards and clearer responsibilities; how to build trust between the public, councils and professional engineers; and whether the new national authority can deliver on its promise of being “faster, more professional and more consistent”.
Whether this reform can ultimately achieve National’s stated goals of “faster consents, lower costs and more construction” remains to be tested through the legislative process and its implementation.
What do you think of this reform?
Do you support establishing a national Building Consent Authority? Do you think giving professional engineers greater sign-off powers could effectively shorten consenting times and lower building costs? Or would it introduce new regulatory and liability risks?