This inquiry has been very challenging, and has taken a long time to complete. The difficulty we had in completing the inquiry reflects the scale and complexity of the problems that have beset the Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Drainlayers Board (the Board). It also reflects that the last two years have been a time of considerable change for the Board and the trades it regulates.
In September 2008, the then Minister for Building and Construction asked the then Auditor-General to consider carrying out this inquiry. The request was prompted by concerns about the number and nature of complaints received by the Minister and the Department of Building and Housing, many of which suggested that the Board was not carrying out its core functions adequately.
Earlier in 2008, the Minister had replaced most of the appointed members of the Board. The new Board members took office with a clear understanding that their role was to address the problems confronting the Board.
I record at the outset that the Board members have all been co-operative, and focused on the need to tackle problems, throughout our work.
Purpose
Parliament has given the Board significant statutory powers to regulate the plumbing, gasfitting, and drainlaying trades. The work of the Board is important from a public safety perspective, because poor work in any of these trades can endanger people and property. But it is also important for the people regulated by the Board: the Board's decisions affect whether and how a plumber, gasfitter, or drainlayer can work.
Like any public sector organisation exercising public power, it is vital that the Board uses its statutory powers properly. The courts have developed a body of law (known as administrative law) to safeguard people against the improper use of public power. The principles of administrative law are often summarised as being "simply that the decision-maker must act in accordance with the law, fairly and reasonably".1
These principles are essentially the hallmarks of good administration. A well-administered organisation has a clear understanding of its legal powers and obligations, supported by well-documented policies and procedures that help its staff to collect the right information, consider all the relevant factors, follow the right process, and explain the process and the decision to the person affected by it. Its work is transparent and documented, its processes are fair, and it can explain the reasons for all of its decisions and actions.
This inquiry essentially assessed whether the Board was meeting these standards. In looking at whether the Board was carrying out its functions properly, we were therefore often also considering legal questions. Good administration and legality are inextricably linked for bodies exercising public power.