A quick question...

"A Lower Hutt plumber has been fined $1,600 for illegally carrying out plumbing work. "...

He gained his rego BUT had no current license so in my view they are wrong to label him a "plumber"(no insult intended), as he did not have a current valid license in terms of law i would have thought he would be looked at as a member of the public based on the sole fact he did not have a valid current license...For example if i gain my rego in 1990 worked as a plumber for ten years or so and then decided to do something else with my life and now in 2011 was caught doing plumbing illegally...it would be wrong to lable me a plumber simply because i gained my rego many years ago...In my eyes you can only lable someone a plumber if they hold a current valid license otherwise they are a member of the public and so the money used to persue them must come from the Prosecutions Fee, I know its a bit perdantic but you know what, F--k em they want to be perdantic little pricks so can i!.

And i still detest having to pay a (Prosecutions Fee)for these goop heads to prosicute a member of the public this part of the boards actions have got frick all to do with the regulation of trained proffesionals the likes of us! and so its common scense that this part of the boards activities should be publicly funded.
Or should this part be handed over to the police and the courts as persons doing plumbing work for money illegally are actually commiting fraud and should be put through the court system...
Any way i know in my heart it is not correct for trained licensed proffesionals like us to be paying for members of the public to be prisicuted.

The thing that rearly pisses me off is i know it not right and i know the board knows it is not right that we have to fit a public bill yet they doggdley put on there horse blinders and follow that straight railway track.

Look at it this way is the discipline levy that lawyers pay used to conduct investigations and procusition fees into people that are not lawyers or is this fee looked after by the public sector?

So what do the rest of you think should we have to fit this bill?

1.  The PGDB should pursue Government to give some of the gas levy to them to go towards prosecutions of members of the public
2.  Charge practitioners the "actual costs" arising out of disciplinary action against practitioners (as opposed to what is being charged now)
3.  Let the PGDB do the initial investigation into unlicensed people and then hand over the information to the TA's or the Police to finish off the prosecution
4.  Tidy up their investigative procedures so that they are efficient (put it out to competitive tender)
5.  Be transparent in how they come up with the proposed levies
6.  Do what Minister Williamson told them to do and that is a complete review of all levies and fees not some one!

I was thinking even though you may be on the register as having gained your qualifications ect etc you are actually NOT a plumber unless you hold a current license...and the money used to prosicute you should not come out of the displinary levie simply based on the fact that you have not paid any fees namely a displinary fee so the money used must come out of the prosecutions fee...For example I studied,sat and passed my Ht license a number of years ago...i neglected to get my medical (required every 3 years) to maintain a current license...if i drive a truck and crash it today then they will not report me as a truck driver they will report me as an UNLICENSED truck driver...even though i hold all the qualifications of a HT driver...im just thinking that these people fined while not holding a current license should be labled as UNLICENSED plumbers...NOT just simply as a plumber.
The simple reason the PGDB call these people plumbers is so that they can make there stats look good in there anual release and to justify the exorbitent displinary fees that they charge us.

...it pisses me off that they group me with UNlicensed persons in there report...to me if you dont have a current license then you cant be called a plumber because it implys that you and me are the same...but were not cus im a legal licensed plumber and you are a unlicensed plumber.

But thats just my view anyways how ever strange it may seem...lol.

With all the name changes etc - I understand it as follows:

Registration = a qualification - you become a registered plumber upon completion of National Certificate AND passing the registration exam AND applying for a current licence.  You hold this qualification for life unless you are removed from the register for something pretty bad, or you die.
If you are registered, but do not hold a current practicising licence you will be prosecuted through the District Court - the same as a member of the public who undertakes plumbing, gasfitting or drainlaying without a licence under the Act.

Licensed Plumber/Gasfitter/Drainlayer = you have attained the qualification and have maintained your licence - you will be disciplined through the PGDB process.

Exemption Holders = will be dealt with through the PGDB process as you are on their books - if your supervisor (i.e. the person who has signed off your exemption) is implicated, they will be charged alongside you and be dealt with through the PGDB process.

Disciplinary Levy = used to discipline through the PGDB process all Licensed/Certifying practitioners and exemption holders.
Prosecution Fee - used to prosecute registered but unlicensed and members of the public