Double standards, CTV families say
WELLINGTON: Family members of victims who died in the 2011 CTV Building collapse have accused New Zealand’s professional engineering body of ‘‘the worst example of double standards’’ in punishing one of the building’s designers while dropping disciplinary action against his boss.
A judicial hearing at the High Court in Wellington began yesterday to determine if Engineering New Zealand, formerly the Institution of Professional Engineers (Ipenz), should have pursued proceedings against Alan Reay.
Dr Reay’s company, Alan Reay Consultants, was responsible for designing the sixstorey Christchurch office block that collapsed in the February 22, 2011, quake that killed 115 people.
A royal commission of inquiry into the Canterbury earthquakes criticised Dr Reay for giving inexperienced structural engineer David Harding ‘‘sole responsibility’’ for the building’s mid1980s design.
Prof Maan Alkaisi, whose wife Maysoon Abbas died in the collapse, yesterday accused Ipenz of ‘‘the worst example of double standards’’ by punishing Mr Harding but taking no action against Dr Reay.
‘‘This was in spite of the fact that both were members of Ipenz, both resigned before the disciplinary action, and both had the same responsibilities in the design of the CTV Building,’’ Prof Alkaisi, spokesman for the CTV Families Group, said.
‘‘Not only is this hearing about accountability but it is also about public safety — the need to send a strong message to the construction industry and practising engineers.’’
The chief engineer for Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) made a complaint to Ipenz about Dr Reay’s involvement in the CTV Building in 2012.
But Dr Reay resigned his voluntary membership of the institute in February 2014 while it was investigating the complaint and later it decided not to pursue any disciplinary action against him.
Ipenz concluded it no longer had jurisdiction to deal with a former member.
A September 2014 decision by the High Court relating to Mr Harding ruled that an investigation and disciplinary hearing could continue even when a member resigned.
Last year, a police probe concluded that no criminal charges would be laid despite ‘‘significant’’ design deficiencies.
In 2015, the attorneygeneral filed for a judicial review of the Ipenz decision.
‘‘It is important that we clarify the law as to whether a professional can avoid disciplinary proceedings by simply resigning,’’ then building and housing minister Nick Smith said in March 2015.
‘‘Completing the Ipenz investigation will also be important in clarifying the professional standards expected of a senior engineer supervising the work of a more junior engineer.’’
The attorneygeneral is seeking the Ipenz decision to be overturned and for Engineering New Zealand to complete the investigation into the professional conduct of Dr Reay’s role in the design of the CTV Building.
Engineering New Zealand says it will abide by whatever decision the court makes. — NZME