Watch the full series: YouTube Playlist

Listen to the full series: Podcast Page

‍

Unacceptable Solutions Episode 6: Conflicting Policies, New Laws and the Ethics of Cladding

The cladding crisis presents a unique prism through which to view world events. I argue that it has come about by the collision of three forces. Globalisation, privatisation, and urbanisation have created a vortex in which the pursuit of profit has defeated the right to safe shelter. Let me explain my theory.

The influx of ACP began in the nineties when patents expired on early forms of ACP and global markets converged to see imports flourish from more competitive manufacturing economies. 

At the same time, by 1994, neo liberal thinking was driving our policy thinkers and lawmakers to make governments smaller by outsourcing things previously done by the government, the example on point being the certification of housing as safe for occupation. 

And by the new millennium when these two forces had gathered momentum came urbanisation and the biggest shift in housing preference we have ever seen in this country to a point where by 2015 more attached housing than detached housing was being approved in every capital of every state and territory in the country.  

It was cheap product, loose regulations and insatiable demand that to my way of thinking caused the cladding crisis. My second theory is that by corollary it is only more expensive housing outcomes, tighter regulations and discerning demand that we emerge from the crisis. 

Cheap products will always be appealing, and the lowest common denominator will always drag us down so perhaps that’s not the place to start. Its tighter regulations that is the key and that will rid us of cheap nasty products and enable purchasers to see the difference between good and bad. 

The regulatory responses of our governments have been patchy but there are three standouts that hold great hope for the future. The first two are from Queensland. Queensland has legislated a duty of care to make housing safe, not merely to comply with minimum standards. The second innovation there is supply chain certification of imported products. Every handler of each shipment has to tag and sign off the products as complaint and will be held accountable for their share of liability if things go awry. The third stand out reform comes from New South Wales where a building commissioner has been appointed with wide ranging powers to enter sites and stop work if not satisfied with the quality. A few wins on this front and some benchmark reporting in the quality of work of different developers will make it easier for NSW purchasers at least to see the difference in quality previously not visible to the naked and untrained eye. Hopefully other states will follow with this reform. 

And then we come to the ethics of building and property development. It is inconceivable that in the 30 years that the ACP market flourished in Australia that people in a position of leadership and authority selling this product stopped and said it’s just not right that we test the aluminum parts of ACP in the furnace but not the stuff in the middle that burns like petrol.

We need the captains of the property industry, perhaps ones that come from publicly listed companies and subscribe to new ethics and social responsibility charters for corporate governance to stand as one and say this was wrong, and we won’t let it happen again.

‍