Jozef Imrich, name worthy of Kafka, has his finger on the pulse of any irony of interest and shares his findings to keep you in-the-know with the savviest trend setters and infomaniacs.
''I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center.''
-Kurt Vonnegut
Generic Drugs, Explained: Where They’re Made and Who Inspects Them
ProPublica: “These days, we know where almost everything comes from. Everyday items like food, clothes and pens all carry labels listing where things are grown, manufactured or even designed. So why is it so hard to find where prescription drugs are made?
That question set off a 14-month investigation into where our medications are made, how the FDA polices drug manufacturers and what happens when inspectors report issues inside factories. The vast majority of prescriptions filled in the United States are for generic drugs, which are often far cheaper than brand-name alternatives.
For years, Congress, doctors and watchdog groups have questioned the quality of generic drugs made overseas. India produces about half of all generics used in the U.S., but the labels on pill bottles often don’t list where a drug is manufactured…[h/t Pete Weiss]
Use our tool to find where your prescription drugs were made. ProPublica’s Brandon Roberts and a team of data journalists made a tool called Rx Inspector that will show you the facility that manufactured your generic prescription drugs and any inspection reports, warning letters and import bans we have from the FDA…”
Randwick City Council enforces building, environmental, and local laws through its compliance officers, environmental health officers, and rangers.
Key Compliance Areas & Requirements
Building & Development Approvals: Most building, demolition, or land-use changes require prior consent or certificates (such as a Construction Certificate, Complying Development Certificate, or Occupation Certificate) under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Applications are lodged via the NSW Planning Portal.
Complying Development (CDC): Fast-track approvals are available for low-impact or eligible residential/commercial projects through Council or an accredited private certifier. See more via Randwick City Council Complying Development.
Environmental & Public Health: Council regulates food premises, public health, local pollution, trees, swimming pool safety barriers, and noise under legislation like the Local Government Act 1993 and Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. [1]
Penalties & Enforcement: Unauthorised or non-complying works can lead to on-the-spot fines ($3,000–$6,000), formal remedial/demolition orders, or court action. [1]
How to Contact Council Compliance
In Person / Mail: Customer Service Centre at 30 Frances Street, Randwick NSW 2031 (Open Monday to Friday, 8:30am–5:00pm).
Reporting Breaches: You can report development consent breaches to your appointed Principal Certifier, or report illegal works, environmental issues, and urgent safety concerns directly to Randwick City Council Compliance & Enforcement.
Couple furious as neighbour's build bypasses council approvals
There's only a tiny gap between the houses which the...
more
A couple who say they had to jump through so many regulatory hoops to put a second storey on their home in Sydney’s east are fuming that their neighbours have been able to bypass council with their even bigger build.
Scott and Debbie told A Current Affair on Monday that they’ve been losing sleep over the construction which they say will cost them their privacy and is creating damage to their own home.
When the couple renovated their property in 2011, Scott and Debbie had to seek council approval which they say compelled them to make a number of changes to their original plans in order to comply.
One of those changes was to remove a planned balcony off the back of their second storey extension to avoid “looking down into other people’s backyards,” Scott told the program.
Now their neighbours have started building a second storey on their property with their new extension going significantly further than Scott and Debbie’s and raising privacy concerns.
Scott and Debbie said their neighbours managed to get a bigger extension than theirs without going through council. Picture: A Current Affair/Nine
The couple says the construction has left them with cracks and some water damage. Picture: A Current Affair/Nine
“They’ve extended all the way to the end of our pergola so that’s basically two extra rooms [one upstairs, one downstairs] that they’ve added [to the] floorspace ratio,” Scott said.
Meanwhile Debbie recounted an incident where she was in her upstairs bedroom, “looking at fluoro-vested men hanging over the scaffold and looking into me in my bed.”
The neighbours were able to avoid going through the regular council approval process by lodging a Complying Development Certificate (CDC) that was approved by a private certifier.
This process is designed to cut red tape and allow for faster development by bypassing the council almost entirely if the proposed development is straightforward and meets certain requirements.
However, Scott and Debbie have since gone to council after they ran into problems since construction began next door.
The house was sold for over $3 million last year. Picture: Ray White
What the rear of the house looked like before the build. Picture: Ray White
They say they’ve noticed cracks appearing on the wall closest to their neighbour, as well as some water damage after rain, issues which their neighbours have verbally agreed to fix.
The properties are separated at the back by a tiny gap which Scott says will eventually have a box gutter installed for rainfall. However, the area does have flood considerations attached to it which, along with the neighbours’ decision to concrete their backyard, has caused the couple concern.
The home, which originally had three bedrooms and one bathroom, was sold for over $3 million at the end of last year.
A spokesperson from Waverly Council told news.com.au in a statement: “The development is pursuant to a Complying Development Certificate.
Only a small gap separates the houses at the rear. Picture: A Current Affair/Nine
“Under the New South Wales Government’s planning framework, private certifiers are responsible for determining whether a development satisfies development standards.
“They must also undertake mandatory inspections throughout construction and address any non-compliance with approved plans or legislative requirements.
“Council has formally written to [the certifier] requesting the matters raised be urgently reviewed and responded to directly.
“[The certifier has] confirmed it will review the concerns, contact Mr Walker directly and advise Council once a response has been provided.”
The building commission told A Current Affair that the certifier had faced disciplinary action in the past but would not confirm whether it’s investigating the certifier.
A small group of private certifiers have signed off on 130 buildings with compliance problems, including allowing residents to move into one property that did not have toilets or taps fitted.
The six offenders have been hit with 111 disciplinary actions since 2005, accounting for about a quarter of all such penalties.
Lyall Dix, who enjoys Sydney Harbour views from his Vaucluse home, received the largest ever fine of $50,000 in 2012.RENEE NOWYTARGER
Breaches from the 142 certifiers disciplined include a Mosman shop "unfit for habitation", a childcare centre that was a "recipe for disaster" and a bowling alley considered a "hazard". In another case a certifier was cautioned for a "potential conflict of interest" when he certified a project he was involved in developing.
The Building Professionals Board regulates certifiers and maintains a public register of disciplinary actions, with the most serious cases referred to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
Private certification was introduced in NSW in 1998 and means a developer can pay a certifier of their choice to inspect construction work at critical stages and ensure it meets legal requirements.
Repeat offending has soared even though then planning minister Brad Hazzard reportedly ordered the board in 2012 to get "tougher with those small number of certifiers who play games" and "seem to be popping up regularly". The board has handed out stiffer financial penalties since then but the number of certifiers having their accreditation cancelled has only jumped since February, two months after cracking forced the evacuation of the Opal Tower.
South Coast certifier Glenn Fitzgibbon was rebuked 29 times in 11 years before his accreditation was cancelled in June. The breaches included the bowling alley hazard, a light industrial site "not suitable for occupation", certifying building work in breach of conditions on his licence and a house that contained "substantial" defects.
Lyall Dix, who enjoys Sydney Harbour views from his Vaucluse home, received the largest ever fine of $50,000 in 2012 for signing off on an Allawah unit block with fire safety issues and an extra apartment, lift shaft and car park. It was less than half the maximum $110,000 fine the board can impose.
A year earlier, Mr Dix was temporarily suspended for allowing occupation of a Mascot building deemed a "hazard" to the health and safety of occupants and where toilet pans, hand basins and bathroom taps had not been installed.
He has been reprimanded, cautioned or fined over 14 other properties, including Drayton's winery at Pokolbin, where he failed to forward copies of critical stage inspections to the council.
Mr Dix and Mr Fitzgibbon did not reply to Herald requests for comment.
The board issued a $5000 fine for construction on contaminated land at Alexandria and a $3000 fine to a certifier who put misleading information in a statutory declaration.
The Owners' Corporation Network, the peak body for apartment owners, said the repeat offending was further evidence of "deep systemic problems" in the industry.
"It is symptomatic of a government that has forgotten how to regulate," chairman Phil Gall said.
The Building Professionals Board was overseen by the planning minister until 2016, when it became the responsibility of the minister for better regulation. "Three years later we still have serious problems," Mr Gall said. "How did the ministers involved not know this reform wasn't working?"
A building in the Mosman retail area was signed off even though it was not fit for occupation. NICK MOIR
The state government announced a new plan on December 30 last year to complement the newly passed Building and Development Certifiers Act 2018. It includes harsher penalties for certifiers who are corrupt or who negligently sign off on a building that is unsafe or structurally unsound. The draft plan will be the subject of public consultation in coming months.
Minister for Better Regulation and Innovation Kevin Anderson did not directly answer the Herald's questions about serial offending by certifiers and instances where hazardous buildings were deemed fit for occupation. But he stressed the industry was undergoing major reform to ‘‘improve the transparency, accountability and quality".
"With the appointment of David Chandler OAM, as the first ever NSW Building Commissioner, we are now moving into the next phase of the reform process," Mr Anderson said.
The Association of Accredited Certifiers (AAC) represents building certifiers across NSW. Chief executive Jill Brookfield agreed the Building Professionals Board needed to "urgently improve its auditing and investigation processes to ensure anyone doing the wrong thing is found and tossed out".
The board has an audit program to provide an independent check of the work of accredited certifiers. However, documents sought under freedom of information by the Association of Accredited Certifiers show no audits were performed by the Building Professionals Board in either 2015-16 or 2016-17. Last financial year 13 audits were begun.
While certifiers carry out inspections, they are not responsible for supervising work throughout construction and are entitled to rely on documentation from other building professionals.
"It is critical that every practitioner takes responsibility and accountability for the work or services they provide," Ms Brookfield said. "AAC is calling for the accreditation of all persons involved in the design and construction process … which was the original intention of the legislation, however never enacted by government."
Sixteen certifiers have had their accreditation cancelled since 2005, with a third of those actions taken since February. The longest period an accreditation has been cancelled is five years.
One certifier, Peter Boyce, has been allowed to continue to practise by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal while he challenges the cancellation of his accreditation. The tribunal took into account the effect on his employees and clients in its decision.
The Building Professionals' Board said Mr Boyce should not be able to continue working on his firm's 2199 active files because the case against him ‘‘was strong and it involved issues of public safety''. Mr Boyce did not respond to a request for comment.
Carrie Fellner is an investigative reporter for The Sydney Morning Herald.Connect via X or email.
