Building regulations will not become simpler through relocation

Viðskiptaráð has submitted a consultation response on proposed amendments to the Buildings Act. The proposals are part of a comprehensive review of the administration of building affairs, aimed at a simpler and more objective-driven building regulation, more efficient and risk-based oversight, and greater consumer protection.

Viðskiptaráð supports the government's aim of simplifying the framework for construction, having called for years for simpler and more efficient rules and oversight in this area. The organisation also agrees with the analysis of the current system set out in the proposals. Permitting and oversight processes for construction are often time-consuming and inconsistent between municipalities, and the administration is extensive and complex. The building regulation also contains detailed provisions on the technical design and execution of structures, which can limit the scope for achieving the regulation's objectives through other, more efficient means or new solutions. It is therefore essential that the legislation supports a simpler and more objective-driven building regulation.

Overly detailed requirements and complex administration tend to increase building costs and delay development without a corresponding benefit. Viðskiptaráð therefore supports moving the regulatory framework onto a more objective-driven and risk-based footing, where the focus is on safety and quality while scope is increased for cost-effective solutions.

Risk-based oversight and independent inspection bodies

Viðskiptaráð has generally emphasised that official oversight should be designed to be as unburdensome as possible and that the associated costs should be minimised, without relaxing the necessary requirements for safety and quality. Viðskiptaráð agrees with the policy set out in the proposals that building oversight should become risk-based, so that its scope reflects the nature, extent and risk of each project. Simple, low-risk projects should therefore not be subject to the same administrative and oversight burden as large-scale and complex construction.[1]

It is also positive that technical oversight of design and execution is intended to be moved, to a significant extent, from building officers to independent inspection bodies. Official oversight does not, in all cases, need to be carried out by the authorities themselves, and separating the administrative and operational aspects of oversight promotes a more efficient arrangement. Viðskiptaráð believes that the performance of oversight should be entrusted to accredited inspection bodies, since accreditation independently ensures their competence and impartiality.

The proposals envisage that inspection bodies will be required to follow HMS's rules, guidance and inspection checklists. In implementing the changes, care must be taken to ensure that simplifying the building regulation does not, in effect, result in detailed requirements removed from the regulation simply being shifted into guidance, checklists or other material published by the authorities. It is therefore important that there is a clear distinction between binding requirements on the one hand, and guidance and checklists on the performance of oversight on the other. Such material should support consistent practice rather than constitute independent substantive requirements beyond what follows from laws and regulations. Otherwise, there is a risk that the intended simplification will not, in practice, reduce the regulatory burden for those who must comply with the rules.

Viðskiptaráð also considers it positive that the current building supervisor system is to be abolished and that the responsibilities of project owners, designers and master craftsmen are to be clarified. It is important that this change results in a simpler and clearer division of responsibility, rather than an increased administrative burden or duplication of work.

Sanctioning and intervention powers must be clearly defined

Viðskiptaráð has no objection to HMS having adequate means to respond to serious or repeated breaches. The proposals include, among other things, powers for HMS to impose daily fines or administrative fines, halt work, and revoke or withdraw certifications, rights or permits. These are onerous measures that can have a significant impact on business operations and the legal position of individuals and companies.

In drafting the bill, it must therefore be ensured that the conditions for applying each measure are clear and predictable, that sanctions are proportionate to the nature and severity of the breach, and that milder measures are applied where they are sufficient to achieve the objective of the oversight. Greater emphasis on risk-based building oversight should lead to more targeted oversight and a lower administrative burden where risk is low, rather than creating a general authority for increased oversight or onerous intervention without clear and objective criteria.

An opportunity that should be seized in the right way

Viðskiptaráð supports the aims of the proposals for a simpler and more objective-driven regulatory framework, more efficient and risk-based oversight, and more consistent administration of building affairs. In its view, the proposals represent an opportunity to significantly simplify a regulatory framework that has a direct impact on the cost and pace of building housing and other structures.

However, in order for these objectives to be achieved, care must be taken to ensure that technical requirements removed from the building regulation are not simply shifted into material published by the authorities. The success of the changes should be assessed on whether they actually reduce unnecessary requirements and administrative steps, shorten processing times, increase scope for new and cost-effective solutions, and lower the cost of construction, without relaxing the necessary requirements for safety and quality.

This article was automatically translated from the Icelandic original.