Matty, how

are you, mate?

Great.

That's

I just wanted to see

how you would reply.

I'm great.

We are making really

good progress on

some of our projects.

Finally got this

cork flooring

sorted, it seems.

off to, and I'll

give them a plug,

the pro climber,

seminar this afternoon

about moisture in

our buildings run by

them, which would be

really interesting.

, but enough about us.

Who are we

speaking to today?

Today we are joined

by Laura Tanova, who's

a building surveyor.

She has a company

called Deem to perform.

And I first Met Laura,

, probably three to four

years ago when she

put us through the

absolute ringer to get

a building permit on

one of our projects.

That makes me happy.

That makes me so

happy that you'll put

through the ringer.

do you know

what was really

fantastic about it?

Cause obviously

I'm all, you know,

bettering ourselves

and I guess really

understanding how.

These processes work.

We were really

grateful.

And Laura, I hope,

you know, I'm

speaking on behalf

of both of us here.

Like it was a really

collaborative effort

to get that building

permit across the line,

but look enough about

all that kind of stuff.

Tell us a little

bit about yourself.

I'm a building

surveyor, you know,

everyone's favorite,

person on a, on a job.

. I've been in the

industry for nearly,

uh, two decades now.

, started off in, uh,

drafting actually.

in Canada, so I moved

back to Australia,

which is my homeland

and, uh, got involved

with modular housing.

So project management,

technical compliance

for, , offshore

procured building

products and modular

construction, primarily

in Western Australia.

And a bit of work,

, overseas to public

beginning and, kind

of an interesting,

uh, foray then into

building surveying.

So most building

surveyors I think

you'll find didn't

come straight out

of high school and.

Decide, you know,

I wanna be a

building surveyor.

Often people don't

really, uh, know

too much about it.

And, yes, just found

my way, , through

managing compliance

to get into building

surveying, which, , I

now love and, you

know, it's an industry

that's a hard one.

But, um, I enjoy,

the consulting

side of it now.

And, that was a

great experience

with your team there.

And I agree.

It was, uh, really.

that they're working

towards, whether it's

the building stay on

the other side, design

team construction.

yeah, they're all

values that I like

to bring to projects.

So, I've got a question

here and it goes

back to when Hamey

said that you put him

through the ringer.

Why does some building

surveys really go

through the details

and others don't?

Like, how does some

get away with it

and others don't?

Because the one we

work with is the same.

Like, I'm assuming

the same as you,

like, everything is

documented, everything

has to be proven.

But then you get with

some and it's like,

well, they're not

asking for anything.

And it's so confusing

to the industry.

Yeah, look, that's

a very common bit of

feedback that we get,

often when you are

one of the building

surveyors and we're

putting people through

the ringer, you get

asked, well, I've

never been asked

this, why is this?

I think a lot of it

comes down to , at

what point in time

the building surveyors

became building

surveyors, the

industry has changed

quite a lot, and

professionalism and

detail is becoming

more of a requirement

and an expectation.

So, it shouldn't

be this way.

There's often left to

building surveyors,

, appetite for risk and

what they're willing

to take on, but

shouldn't be that way.

Everyone should

be working to the

same standard.

, but yeah, it's just

been an industry I

think that hasn't

been as regulated

and people have come

in it with, with

different backgrounds.

Some people are more

open to seeing on

site and dealing

with it during

their inspections.

I don't necessarily

agree with that

approach because I

think, putting people

through the ringer

earlier on in a

project and getting

everything documented.

It's easier to deal

with when it's early

on as opposed to later

on, and there's more

complexities with

projects once you

start getting things

into the ground.

Like, there's nothing

worse when it gets to

the end of a project,

and then they start

asking for all the

documentation, and

then they've got

questions around that,

and it's like, why

didn't we fucking solve

this at the start?

Like, we had 12 months

pre construction to

work through all of

this, and now you want

to work through it?

Do you think it's

because you care?

Yeah, look, I certainly

care about the, the

end result and, part

of my job is to make

sure that the consumer

and future consumers

are also protected,

not just individuals

who are building, I

mean, the builders.

It's not the only

person involved with

it and obviously

they've got their own

professional side of it

that needs to be looked

at and everyone's got

their own, professional

liabilities that are an

issue, but also, it's

not just about minimum

requirements or what

you can get away with.

It's about having

a product for a

consumer who may not

lifetime consumer.

You'll have someone

who owns a property,

later on, so that they

are entitled to those

same rights as whoever

is constructing it

and the owner of the

property at that time.

you, would you say,

Laura, that one of

the reasons why we do

see building surveyors

approach issuing

building surveys?

permits and maybe

during their

inspections on site

maybe there's a

difference there

because the, the code

is maybe up to their

own interpretation.

There is an element of

that and how far they

want to push things.

Yeah, and the

interpretation of

regulation, a lot of

it comes down to the

background of, of the

building surveyor, too.

It's, there are

some people who have

personalities that they

see things, It's a lot

more black and white,

others get caught up

in grey areas some

have had experiences

with authorities

that have interpreted

things a certain way

so that applying that

interpretation where

others don't, so yeah,

it does add confusion

and a lot of conflict

with builders and

designers because,

one, building survey

is one thing and, you

know, it changes and,

it's frustrating for,

for everyone involved.

it's real simple, I

think, for people on

site though, just, if

the building surveyor

or building inspector

asks you to do

something, just fucking

shut up and listen.

Like, don't bother,

unless you've got

a fair, a very fair

point, and you are

building with NICO,

and you can actually

prove it by pointing

to a clause, yeah,

sweet, go for it, like,

stick up for yourself.

But half the time,

my, what I'll tell my

team is just listen,

learn from it, and

just do what they say,

because at the end

of the day, they're

signing off on it too.

that's right.

And I think if

you take it at the

perspective of, well,

what is the building

performance and what

is the best outcome?

It's not just about,

well, I read the code

this way, you read

the code that way.

Well, doesn't make the

pub test in terms of,

Is this a good outcome?

Is it, if it's a

mistake and it doesn't

comply, well there's

a reason why that

particular code is in

place because there's

an element of building

long term building

performance, not just

the performance in

the now, the long

term performance.

So Laura, correct

me if I'm wrong, you

have been a statutory

building surveyor,

correct.

Yep,

, and now you act more of

a consultative building

surveyor, is that the

right terminology?

Thank you.

consultant.

Yeah, consultant

building surveyor.

So I do still do some

statutory functions.

It's not a major

part of my business,

And I have worked

in council as well

as private Doing

the statutory roles.

So the consultant

obviously the

appointments It's the

consultant You know,

not an appointment

under the Building Act.

I'm able to get

involved with designs

and give design advice,

work through, other

authority, have due

performance solutions,

dispensations, all

those sorts of things

that a statutory

building surveyor can't

get involved with.

So you said

performance solutions.

They seem to be the

hot thing at the moment

in every project.

Seems like we

need tons of them.

Where have they

come from and

like, are they?

Why does it seem

we need to have a

performance solution

for everything

these days?

Yeah, it's interesting.

Again, it's one of

these changes more

in the approach to

building surveyors

and surveying.

The actual structure

of the code hasn't

had any recent,

changes in terms

of how you actually

comply with the code.

That remains the same.

So really, there

shouldn't be

an increase in,

performance solution.

I understand that

they're being asked for

more and it is coming

more, but I think

that's more around the

changes in the industry

and the context of how

the code is being read.

A lot of that has to

do with the VBA code

of conduct that came

into place as well.

That's had a big impact

on building surveyors

and how they accept

performance solutions.

like it's very

clear you cannot

get involved.

So that's often

triggered, I think

the introduction of

that code of conduct

has really triggered

building surveyors

to actually ask for

a formal performance

solution, where in

the past they may have

made a determination

about a certain design

variation and maybe

just, sort of dealt

with it themselves,

but the Code of Conduct

has come into place

and it's very clear

about the distinction

of the relevant

building surveyor and

their role in that,

that they're just

making a determination

and it's really up

to the applicant

to provide and

demonstrate compliance.

We did have the

introduction of

the brief as well,

so that's a more

recent change.

Not that it has

changed the structure

of compliance, But

it has added an

element to document,

how to document a

performance solution.

And I know it seems

very painful and

adding to the amount

of documentation that

goes into a building

permit, but it's

actually a really

important process so

that decisions are

documented and it

improves accountability

across the design.

Obviously if you

go a deemed to

satisfy route.

There's, historical

performance um, not

that the deemed to

satisfy is the best

method of construction.

It's just a minimum

requirement, one

that has been sort

of tried and tested.

So there's a, taken

industry, there's

been input ongoing

throughout the codes

that that complies.

Going to performance

solution, there is

none of that historical

documentation to back

it up, which is why we

need accountability in

these design decisions.

Yeah, so really the

answer to that question

is, the structure

of compliance.

I mean, you have

to comply with the

governing provisions

and performance

provisions.

They're the only

mandatory parts

of the code.

It's really the context

and industry in which

the code is being

read as opposed to

the actual NCC itself.

I might just take an

opportunity, maybe

just to say, um, uh,

for, for my own brain.

So a statutory

certifier or, or

building surveyor,

and it's probably

worthwhile, you know,

for those listening

outside of Victoria to,

define what a building

surveyor is here.

And that is someone

who wishes a building

permit and then

checks off certain

stages of the project.

And I think in other

States, they're called

building certifiers.

Is that correct?

Yep, cool.

So I guess the

statutory one is

the one that issues

building permits and

then, checks it off

and signs it off as

the project goes.

But in a consulting

role, you are, I guess,

helping the builder

and the client navigate

different areas of the

NCC to meet compliance.

Is that right?

correct.

Can we also add in

there that there's also

building inspectors and

building inspectors?

That there's two

different types

of inspectors?

Laura, to comment on

building inspectors?

I mean, the immediate

one that comes to

my brain is the tick

tocking inspector.

Everyone seems

to know him.

Oh yes, everyone

knows that.

Yeah, so look,

inspectors, they're

working on behalf of

the building surveyor.

So the notification

needs to come from

the builder to the

building surveyor

and then the building

surveyor either goes

out and conducts the

inspections themselves

or they have in

house or subcontract

inspectors carry

out the inspections

on their behalf and

then, They rely on

a certificate of

compliance during

the construction

phase for that.

But then there's

building inspectors

too that are also

under the same name

that can come do an

inspection during the

middle of construction

to check on the work,

which is totally fine.

I would say encouraged

that they're also

called building

inspectors, but they're

not licensed to sign

off on the permit.

Is that correct?

Well, any inspector

that mandatories

under the building

permit, they need

to be registered but

any of those sort

of non mandatory

inspections if you're

not a registered

building inspector and

you're stating that

you are a building

inspector, there may

be some, problematic

implications for doing

Because I think there's

a huge amount of

confusion around this

because you have the

building inspectors

that can carry out a

mandatory inspection.

that's a building

inspector that Hamish

and I would know in

any one site that

would most likely

come all the time and

check our footings,

our slabs, our

frame, and the final.

But then you have an

inspector, building

inspector that can

essentially come check

your waterproofing or

they might check the

levels of the slab all

the way, the cutting's

been installed, but

they're still called

building inspectors.

And I think it's

a real confusing

terminology within

the industry about,

some of them, and I'm

not saying some of

them are, some of them

are not, but some of

them are not licensed

building inspectors

under say the VBA.

yeah, and they're,

they're authorised

and same with

the councils too.

The building inspectors

in that regard are

actually authorised on

behalf of the NBS to

carry out inspections

and they're there for

a particular purpose.

Some of those other non

mandatories, they're

inspecting, but they're

more of a consultant

as opposed to any

building, a registered

building inspector.

we touched on

performance solutions

before and and I know

Matt brought up that,

you know, we're seeing

a lot more of them and

actually wonder if.

You know, Matt and

I are experiencing

seeing more performance

solutions in our

projects because I

guess we are building

I guess above the

code or outside the

code or different

building methodologies.

Could you maybe explain

to those who have no

idea what a performance

solution is, what

its function is and

what it's actually

doing and, what its

purpose is in the NCC?

Yeah, so a performance

solution is a mechanism

of demonstrated

compliance where

you haven't met the

recipe book of, of

the building code.

So the building code,

the only mandatory

is these performance

requirements.

Now you can either

go through the recipe

book uh, which is your

deemed to satisfy and

demonstrate compliance

that way without

having to do any

additional reporting.

It can just be

embedded in the

design documentation.

A performance solution

is yes, if you're

doing something

different from those

deemed to satisfy.

Occasionally, there's

parts of the building

code that there

are no deemed to

satisfy provisions.

So you have a

performance provision

that you have to

comply with, but

there are no deemed

to satisfy provisions

for you to follow.

So code silent in

those instances where

the code is silent,

you also need a

performance solution.

you give us an example

of, of where the

code might be silent?

Skylights.

That's one.

Weatherproofing

the skylights.

You have to comply with

the weatherproofing

provisions.

And then also uh,

pool drainage as well.

That's another big

one where there's

a performance

provision for the

drainage of pools.

But there's no way

of demonstrating

compliance under

volume two for that.

Is the code too weak?

yeah, I think it's

slow moving too.

It's often there

are silences or

doesn't deal with

certain construction

techniques,

methodology, materials,

because it's just

a slow moving train

to come up with

what's actually

happening on site.

So you've got things

and practices happening

on site that, generally

across the board,

everyone's okay with

the way that it's being

done, but the code just

hasn't picked it up

in a day to satisfy.

So yeah, you need to

utilize the performance

solution in the

past performance

solutions, were there

more for those design

elements that were

really innovative,

something different.

Now it's almost that

the code just hasn't

kept up with the

industry and, and

what's happening.

And so it's, resulting

in a lot of performance

solutions on permits.

Actually, I think slow

is a really polite

way of putting it.

I think it's laziness.

There's so many

houses being built

in Australia and

we want to build,

what, another 1.

2, 1.

8 million homes.

You would think, and

this is me trying to

apply some form of

common sense, that

you'd have a code that

was quite stable and

would sort of cover

all new technologies

and things like that.

Like I just, just

looking at like what is

2870, what that's from

2011, like most houses

have a slab and that

has never been updated

in how many years?

Like surely, people can

do their job and create

a new standard that

is evolved with time.

on 2870, just because

for those not familiar

with it, it's the

footings and slab

Australian standard.

Matt, have you

ever had a, slab

designed to 2870?

Okay.

Well, it'd have to

because it would have

to, like the whole sub

would have to comply

with it, wouldn't it?

yeah, but all, aren't

all slabs have a reg

one, reg one, two, six

from the engineer say

certifying the design.

Am I right in

saying that Laura?

Like,

yeah,

you can design

a slab to 2870,

but generally our

slabs are designed as

per the engineering

documentation.

don't they have to

follow 28 70 as a guide

yeah.

So there's engineering

principles within 2870.

So there's most,

prescribed method and

then it allows for

engineering principles

within the code.

There's also in the

VCA, there's a section

for slabs as well, for

really simple slabs.

Often you don't,

you don't ever see

them just designed

without an engineer.

There

1 of my absolute pet

hates about Australian

standards is they

are so expensive.

Like I'm looking here.

330 and 47 cents to

just access that one

standard and how many

standards we have.

And if running that

industry worry or

people worry why things

aren't being built to

code or people don't

know the codes, it's

because they're so damn

expensive and people

can't afford to buy

every single standards,

like, how can we make

them accessible for

everyone to be able to

read and access there's

going to be some

form of subscription

that allows us to

cover all these.

are subscriptions and

it's very expensive,

especially for

small operators.

This is a real sore

point of mine and I

don't see it changing.

We made the code

available as in the

NCC free, but most

of the code is within

reference standards

and we're charging

practitioners an arm

and a leg for it.

Just recently with

this new code change

Standards Australia

um, introduced a reader

room which is probably

like a tiny little

token to practitioners

where you can go in

and read the standard.

I think you've got

one access and it's

timed how often

you can use it.

It's pretty cool.

It's almost like,

well, what's the point

of having the code

available for free when

you the code is really

almost become a table

of contents out to the

Australian standards.

couldn't agree more.

And I think I looked

last year, well,

maybe it was earlier

this year at the

subscription because I

needed to buy the new

waterproofing code,

which is the shamozzle

that makes no sense.

And that's being a real

polite way of putting

it that I was trying

to understand and get

my head around it.

So I spoke to them

and they're like,

Oh, you can do a

subscription and you

get five standards

you can access.

And but you only

get them for a year.

And this is how

much it was.

It was the same

price as buying them.

So it was, it was

actually smarter to buy

them than get them on

a yearly subscription.

Because the next year,

if I needed them, I

didn't have access.

I know if I needed

something else.

it's like no one

thought through this.

And we all worry

about why construction

standards somewhat

going backwards

and people aren't

up to date.

That's right.

People, purchased

or had the old

versions and they

just continue to use

that if they've even,

got a copy of that.

They're all

copyright protected.

So it's a real, thorn

in my side for the

industries not having

access to these.

And it keeps

getting raised.

Every time the code

changes, practitioners

are always asking

for it, there's

no government

intervention.

The industry bodies

are trying to do

what they can within.

the models that they

have, but it, it really

needs to be pushed.

So Hamish and I would

pay probably about

1, 600 a year to

the VBA, Victorian

Building Authority.

We receive fuck all

from them for being

that other than a piece

of paper that says

you're now a licensed

builder I would think

that within that amount

they could Negotiate

the australian

standards and ability

to have access as a

registered builder Do

you have access to all

the codes on an online

platform how this has

not been discussed

how it has not come?

about it's seriously

mind numbing like

no one's had that

conversation and yet

they They release all

these practice notes

and stuff trying to

educate people they

say, Oh, refer to

the standard, refer

to the standard.

I sat in the

waterproofing one last

year and for an hour

and a half, people were

asking questions like,

what do you do here?

And they go, Oh,

you need to refer

to the standard.

Oh, you need to refer

to the standard.

They wouldn't even

answer the question.

So for me, it's like

if they're trying to

provide advice and

training and education,

and then you go to

their training seminars

and they go refer to

the standard, like

what's the point?

and as a builder

, given at the end of

the day, we're the

one holding majority

of the liability.

Surely you would make.

It easy access

for us to review

these documents.

Like if they want us

to be better, provide

us with the right

amount of information

to be better,

Oh, the VBA is

a shitshow, just

look at them.

Yesterday three of

them got arrested

for corruption

within the VBA.

Like, come on guys.

Like, we want to be

in the industry, we've

got to lift it up.

Like, I've no problem

calling it out.

I mean, I've and

I've kind of shut the

door on it because

it's, the information

that's being given

to us is not aimed

at practitioners

wanting to improve

interpretation so that,

you know, everyone's

more consistent.

It's aimed at almost

first year students.

It's really quite

It's smoke and mirrors.

They're trying to

show they're doing

something, but they're

not doing anything.

They're like, hey,

we ran a webinar.

Oh, we're here guys,

but we're not going

to do anything.

if our code is in

place to, I guess,

essentially protect

the amenity and well

being of the occupants

within that structure,

in your opinion,

Laura, do you think the

code goes far enough?

And I'm probably

more thinking about

energy efficiency and

I guess protection

of the building

fabric and ultimately

leads to health.

I think it's a

bare minimum.

I don't think it

reflects best practice

or even what's being

on a global scale,

best practice.

So It's serving a

function at a minimum

level but not for a

changing climate, not

for, when you compare

what's considered

a minimum level in

other countries too.

So Look, there are

movements in the right

direction, but as

we said, slow moving

train, just too slow.

Or a train that's

not moving at all.

I think the driver

got off and has gone

for a coffee and

hasn't come back.

Well, it's like that

in some states because

they haven't even

taken up the new codes.

So

states can override.

So,

the code might change,

but they've decided,

no, we're not going

to implement it.

So that's your driver

getting off the

train and going for a

coffee in the smoke.

which kind of makes it

ironic given that it's

called the National

Construction Code.

So why the fuck

isn't it not

nationally mandated?

It blows me away

that states can go,

Oh, you know what?

I don't want

to do that.

the Australian

Building Codes

Board is part of an

intergovernmental body.

So they write

the standards.

But they don't

legislate, so it's

really all building

legislation is

covered by the states.

So it's within that

regulation that this

code that's written

up gets brought in.

And then within each of

those codes there's all

those state variations.

So it's really messy.

And this last

construction code was

just the epitome of, it

really like brought the

magnifying glass to how

much of a mess it is.

We've got, we're

about to go into.

NCC 2025, and some

states haven't

even taken up 2022.

or we've had partial

implementation,

so we'll take some

parts of the code,

but not the others.

So, we're working, like

we've got jobs at the

moment, permits that

are running on three

different versions, and

this is just Victoria,

and then, other states

are doing different

things altogether.

So, at this point

in time, we've got

jobs that are 2019

Amendment 1, we've got

2022 with transitional

provisions, and

then we've got 2022.

Upcoming, with full

code implementation.

I'm actually

looking here at

the members of the

people on the board.

they're all

politicians.

And if they're

not, they're, they

definitely have a

vested interest in

sending the code

one way or another

because they're

working for a company.

So, if you're

company A.

You're going to want to

do everything possible

to keep your company

at the forefront

because profit

drives the company.

So therefore all the

standards will be

built and designed

around what your

product is producing.

You're not going to

go out, if you've

got a competitor that

is pushing something

really new and you're

on an up to date with

it, you're not going

to push for that.

You're going to

try and bring the

code backward.

That's, that's evident

when we have, we look

at say the membranes

we use on our walls

and you've got the

microporous versus

monolithic membranes.

code is based around

the old technology,

because that suits

them and they don't

want to get up to date.

if you've got,

industry parties,

and they've all

come to try and, you

know, with different

vested interests,

it's, it's always

going to slow it.

They'll take up

certain parts of

the code because

they can't agree.

So really dilutes

the process down on

how standards and the

code gets changed.

I'll do a

quick question.

So, obviously Matt

and I, we're high

performance passive

house builders, right?

You know, Matt's

really active on his

social media about

educating, you know,

I'm also involved in

Sustainable Builders

Alliance as well.

I mean, in our bubble,

we feel that the

industry's going in

a, in a better way.

But in your experience

are you seeing

builders, like, want

to do better, want

to be better or are

they just happy with

building what's set out

as a minimum standard

within the NCC?

I think the latter.

yeah, even, I mean,

this recent, you know,

the seven star, livable

housing, all of that.

to a lot of

practitioners, they

seem like massive

changes, but people

are already bettering

what's out there.

They're really

not that big of a

change, but there's

a lot of resistance

to it, a lot.

So coupled with

how things are in

terms of building

costs and that.

I think that it

just exacerbates

the issue too where,

yeah, it's, there's

a lot of resistance

I I personally feel

that this whole rising

building cost thing is

just a, easy scapegoat

for these guys.

good design leads

to good performance.

Like it's

pretty simple.

to point the blame

somewhere else I think

is the biggest cop out.

Ding ding ding,

you win an award.

this is, you know,

this idea of caring,

I mean, you care about

what you're doing

and not just giving

a product that is to

say that, okay, make

minimum compliance.

We've got it through.

We've done our job

, it's caring about what

the product is, how

it's delivered and

the end result is.

and not just from a

minimum requirements

look at seven stars

for a second then.

so we'll just,

we're going to

talk volume builder

for two seconds.

Cause they're the

main ones kicking up a

fuss about the cost of

going from six star to

seven stars is really

expensive apparently.

So if we look at

the way that house

is orientated, you

can get really easy,

quick, passive solar

gain from that.

A simple thing could

be just like, Hey, if

you want to build on

this block, you can't

build these houses.

Cause you don't get

enough solar gain.

Guarantee you that

does not cost.

Any more on the client

and I just practically

picking from a list

that allows them to

get to that seven

stars based on their

block based on the

orientation that would

not cost any more

and it would solve

the problem with the

click of a finger.

It's a mind shift.

it's a mentality of,

changing what we've

been doing it, for

so long in this way.

And now we've got

to, take on other

design concepts

or ways of dealing

with the design.

And it's a real it's

a mental block not

a technical one.

I wonder if COVID

didn't happen in the

prices of construction

didn't go up whether

we'd be having the

same like conversation

because price would

have gone up so much

they wouldn't have

that to leverage off.

it's not just a seven

star that's an issue.

It's livable

housing too.

I mean, implementation

on deliverable housing,

increasing door

widths and corridors

and, they're not

high ticket items.

They're, a bit of

smart design and just

designing around it.

But that's been a

massive issue too.

feel every time there's

a code change, no

matter what it is,

there's this kicking up

about cost without the

sort of the long term

foresight on improving.

Building practices

and housing,

So there was one

time when they went

from I think it was

either zero stars to

a certain star or from

say four to five or

five to six, there

was actually decrease

in the construction

cost to build to that

star, but they never

bring that one up and

that's documented.

That's actually, I

think it's the ABS

study to show the

cost of construction

went down when they

increased the level

of star rating.

something just came to

my mind about, COVID

obviously increasing

building costs and

stuff like that.

Like, I'm a massively

glass half full kind

of person when it comes

to stuff like this.

We spent so much

time in our homes

during COVID and

it was probably the

most amount of time

that any of us have

spent in our homes.

And it's during that

time, particularly

here in Victoria,

where we experienced

being in our homes in

a cold, cold winter.

And it was probably

at that point, the

penny dropped that

our, how terribly

our homes performed.

And we actually saw

a massive uptick.

in interest in

passive house and

high performance

because everyone's

cranking their heater

and their energy

bills are going up.

So in my opinion,

COVID in that sense

has been great

because I actually

think it's extended

people's knowledge and

appetite to make our

homes perform better.

But I think it's

also, as a result,

Made us think about

exactly what we

need in these homes.

Whereas everyone

thinks they need the

double garage and

three bathrooms and

two living spaces

and a theatre room.

People can't afford

that anymore and

I think that's

a massively

amazing thing.

Because we were

building these big

flabby buildings

that you have to

heat and cool.

Now, given we've had

massively increased

costs in energy and

heating and cooling our

homes, the bigger the

home, the more energy

needs to be put in it.

I actually think

as a result, people

are being forced

to build smaller.

So I actually think

that's a really good

thing, in my opinion,

absolutely.

I mean, the reality of

what's happening in our

homes from a thermal

point of view, they're

just, I lived in Canada

for eight years and,

you know, you have

houses there that, It,

is negative 40 and 50

outside and you can

walk around in a, in

a t shirt they have to

design to that because

their climates are so

much more severe than

here for, you know, to

a degree, we've gotten

away with, not as high

performing, but the

reality and people

now seeing, what is

possible with, smart

practitioners doing

the work and actually

have a comfortable

and healthy home.

the NCC is literally

just one step

above illegal.

The five things that

you would change or

would like to see

changed in the NCC to,

give homeowners much

better, healthier,

more energy efficient

environment.

I think part of the

problems with the NCC

at the moment, not just

from a technical point

of view, is actual

use and the ability

for practitioners

to, to be able to use

and get that baseline

right, and then

work at improving.

the technical, because

it, the way that it's

implemented at an

industry level and then

changes, it's making

it really difficult

for practitioners to

be able to decide what

is is minimum enough.

Um, so I think seven

star is a, is a step

in the right direction.

The livable housing

that has more long,

term implications

for housing stock.

But it's not just

the NCC itself.

I think the issues

are are a bit mixed

in terms of what

is better and you

know understanding

that minimum doesn't

necessarily mean

a better product

in the end.

So obviously energy

efficient condensation

are the two, two

big ticket items.

Regulation of roof

plumbing is another,

thing that needs

to be dealt with.

And more from

a regulatory

point of view.

I think in terms of the

NCC itself, some of the

changes that have been

made from readability

point of view have

gone in almost in

the wrong direction.

Someone who's actually

very well versed in

being able to read

and navigate through

the recent changes and

how the NCC structure

has actually made it

more confusing, which

is going to make it

more difficult for

practitioners to

actually be able to.

implement even that,

just above a legal

standard and it's just

not helping the cause

of being able to then

go that next level

with, you know, some

of these condensation

thermal performance

type of matters.

If you can't get

that baseline right,

how can you go to

that next level?

the condensation

management ventilation

of roof spaces is one

item in the code that

is really shitting

me up the wall at

the moment because

Hamish and I wrap

our houses, I don't

even know I should be

saying this because

I don't even know

how many buildings in

Aysen know about this.

So, if we wrap our

house continuously,

it's now not compliant

to the code and that's

if it's a cold roof

with a truss, so

the, the roof, and

what a cold roof is

is when we have our

insulation sitting

at the bottom quarter

of our trusses, okay?

So if we wrap above

it, the ventilation,

what it says here

is that climate zone

six, seven, and eight,

which Melbourne, which

we are here, you need

to have a roof space

that is immediately

above the primary

insulation layout.

Well, we're not,

we're not there.

Immediately above

the sarking with

a vapour permeance

of less than 1.

14 ug which is there

and immediately

above the ceiling

insulation, which

again, the wrap is

not immediately above,

it's actually higher.

So does this mean now

we're not gonna be

able to continuously

wrap our houses

because the code

hasn't been thought

to think about this

when there's actual

studies to pretty much

maybe say that it's

actually better to

wrap it continuously.

yeah, well,

those ventilation

requirements

have considered.

a standard, you know,

like a really standard

way of constructing.

So, I mean, there's

even been a backflip

on the lower level

ventilation because

you know, even from a

standard construction

point of view it was

saying that you have

to have, essentially

have e vents, which

the VBA decided

to, to flip back on

their interpretation.

So it's very

restrictive.

There's actually not

a lot of scenarios

that meet that

first introduction

of roof ventilation

requirements

it's like no one

thought of it.

people thought of

it, they just worded

it in a way to

make it confusing.

So we need a

performance solution.

Sort of almost like,

I feel like sometimes

performance solution

is someone or the

people writing the

code just remove it

as their problem.

Like they're like, Oh,

well, not my problem.

They can work as

performance solution.

Yeah, that's

exactly right.

They've worded the

deemed to satisfy in

such a restrictive

way that it only deals

with one method of

construction, that

it's prohibited another

high performing way

of constructing by

just the way that

it's worded because

it wasn't taken into

consideration at the

time of introduction.

But then it's got

here as well, that

if it's in a bushfire

attack zone, level F

said, you don't need

to worry about it.

no matter what building

you're in, shouldn't

it just matter whether

it's right or wrong?

to me, that even

makes less sense.

We're asking Laura

all these questions

as if she knows all

the answers , and

she can make the

changes itself.

I guess,

I'll wave, I'll wave my

the

wand and,

waving a wand, being

like, oh, we're

doing something.

And that's the thing

with the standards and

different elements of

the code, they don't

read together and

again, livable housing.

They, they half

considered the

waterproofing issue,

surface drainage, but

there's, going to be

another generation

of housing with water

ingress issues because

the code didn't

appropriately deal

with managing that in

the introduction of,

flush thresholds and

Totally, I don't, I

think your assumption

of maybe is like, no,

it will, there will be.

Like there, yeah,

So I've got one final

question before we go.

you've probably seen a

lot of different things

through your time.

Is it building

surveyor, inspecting

things, seeing things?

What's the most stupid

thing that's come

across your desk?

it's often, the way

that people handle.

being told what should

be done as opposed

to, I can't think

of anything, none of

the stupid stuff you

deal with all day

and, dealing with

neighbours complaining

about certain things

that are happening and

why, but it's tough.

Sometimes it just

feels like you're,

you're wading through

mud in trying to get

people up to speed

and to understand why

things are being done

or, come around to,

doing the right thing.

I wonder if a lot of

that comes down to.

education.

I mean, it all comes

into education,

doesn't it?

Like, the fact that

we don't have points,

mind blowing to me.

It is just like,

for fuck sakes, like

every other industry

has it, even In the

construction industry,

it's there, but it

doesn't exist for

builders, which I

find ridiculous.

also think it's silly

that politicians

write the rules and

we don't have experts

in the field writing

the rules like actual

like scientific or

people who would like

PhDs in an area who

know the topic well

to write the rules.

Hey Cameron, if

you're listening,

we've got more work

for you, buddy.

Oh,

scientist.

he is a rocket science.

Hi, Laura.

Thank you so much.

Look, I know that

your business Deemed

to perform has been

incredibly beneficial

for our business.

Particularly with

helping us navigate

that sort of permit

process with a lot

of the performance

solutions that we need.

How can people get

in contact with you?

Cause I know that

you're, you know,

you do such a

fantastic job.

And I know in our

circle of high

performance builders,

You've probably been