How streetlights can create smart cities


The SmartHub.


In Hawaii, they are installing a UbiHub on a streetlight in the region. The municipality will be using the smart city hubs to bring free broadband access to Pana’ewa Park.

Startup Ubicquia has rolled out two streetlight platforms designed for smart cities that integrates Wi-Fi, 4K cameras, directional microphones and neural artificial intelligence (AI) processors.

Called UbiHub, the platforms are compatible with more than 360 million streetlights worldwide and can be installed in seconds by replacing the existing streetlight photocell socket. According to Northeast Group, a smart infrastructure market intelligence firm, integrating multiple functions into one platform for smart cities is a way to reduce the cost of ownership for by 42% compared to conventional solutions.

“Installing Wi-Fi infrastructure into streetlights allows communities to have equitable internet access, expanding broadband and closing the digital divide, and in turn, intelligent data can essential services, portable data communications accessibility and future planning development needs.”

Imagine driving late at night in very low traffic and never stopping for a traffic light because the integrated cameras at intersections see you coming and turn the light to green – or the ambulance routing to the hospital with a critical patient and having a clear traffic path provided.

The platforms allow cities to transform existing streetlights into a network of connected digital assets:

Equipping with something alike the UbiHub can enhance existing use cases by:

  • Enabling faster crime detection, investigation and deterrence.
  • Reducing traffic congestion.
  • Improving pedestrian safety.
  • Increasing bicycle lane utilization.
  • Expanding city broadband deployments to commercial areas and parks.

The Ubihub platform example:

The UbiHub AP6 is a triband Wi-Fi access point that gives communities the ability to enable public Wi-Fi. It uses power over Ethernet to support third-party equipment including cameras or vehicle registration plate readers.

The more advanced UbiHub AP/AI includes the same features as the AP6 but also integrated dual 4K cameras, direction microphones, a neural AI processor and buffers 15 days of video storage.

These platforms can be managed and monitored by Ubicquia’s cloud visualization and analytics management system called UbiVu. The system also support APIs that integrate with third party video management systems, evidence clearance platforms and police real-time crime centers.

Current deployments

Ubicquia has already deployed the systems to several cities in the U.S.

In West Hollywood, California, the city is using the platforms for smart city traffic and curb management capabilities for data on traffic, bicycle and pedestrians as well as public safety measures and future planning development needs for its residents.

In the county of Hawai’i, UbiHub is being used to bring free, high-speed internet to Pana’ewa Park, a recreational and educational area in a zoological and botanical area of the county. The city said the deployment of the streetlight platform is an important step to expanding its broadband and closing the digital divide throughout Hawai’i Island.

There have been 12,500 UbiCells deployed in Ontario, California, for smart lighting analytics and energy savings. The city said the system helps the digital divide by rolling out public Wi-Fi and boosting public safety in one platform.

Streetlights as a smart city solution

Given the wide infrastructure already in place for streetlights, upgrading these lights with smart city capable technology is obviously easier than deploying technology where infrastructure doesn’t already exist.

The ease of adding smart city infrastructure to streetlights has helped accelerate the deployment of these technologies for communities.

While many of these smart city features are new for government agencies and can present challenges for cthem, the trials are being found to overcome these issues with adjustment and improvements in the technology and by learning through the examples of current community groups.

Ubicquia is not the only company working on these technologies and last year, Signify and the Smart City infrastructure Fund demonstrated how smart lamp posts can tackle tasks such as overcrowding, traffic management and body temperature detection. This came as the world was still dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and looking for ways to help improve the situation through technology.

Smart lighting and streetlights have also become an important way for cities to increase 5G infrastructure with the deployment of small cells that boost signals inside cities where they may have trouble moving through buildings, trees and other objects.

Telensa and Eaton Lighting collaborated on a project to integrate lighting, control and smart city solutions using existing streetlight infrastructure to serve as a way for communities to save on energy as well as also putting them on a path toward smart city applications.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

My thoughts on abortion

Stages of Pregnancy: Week by Week

The individual’s right to life does not depend on our consent, but the brutality of abortion is possible today because enough citizens have agreed, either implicitly or explicitly, to close their eyes to the truth about what abortion is. That truth is almost too painful to acknowledge, and many have learned to look away instead.

We talk about abortion with euphemisms such as “women’s rights,” “reproductive freedom,” “bodily autonomy,” and the “right to choose.”

But the right to choose what?

Rarely in our public debates do we argue about what abortion actually is. No one who supports abortion wants to talk about what really happens in every abortion procedure, because that reality is grisly and horrifying. It can persist only when we refuse to acknowledge this violence and the many ways that it damages our society and our solidarity with one another.

For a typical Australian who doesn’t spend much time thinking about abortion, consider what it would mean to admit that in the year 2019, our country has legally sanctioned the killing of over 40,000 human beings.

Think of those women who have had abortions, many of whom did so based on misguided conceptions of freedom and autonomy, but many of whom did so because they simply felt pressured or abandoned. Large numbers of both sets of women have suffered physical harm and psychological trauma as a result, and yet they struggle to give voice to those harms in a culture that claims abortion is either no big deal or a cause for celebration.

Consider the relationships and marriages blighted by abortion, women used and abused by men, children who lost a sibling, grandparents who never got to meet a grandchild. No family has ever been better off because of abortion.

Think about the doctors who performed these abortions, who used their medical expertise to kill the vulnerable patient in the womb. It might be difficult to feel empathy for them, but how can they perform abortions and not be harmed by having committed such an act of evil? As Aristotle taught, we become what we do. Those who kill become killers.

Think of the countless politicians and activists who have enabled and promoted abortion, pretending it is a simple, harmless medical procedure, akin to having a tooth pulled.

Think of those who have done nothing to stop this terror.

Think of those—ourselves included—who haven’t done enough.

These are the costs of admitting the truth about abortion, just a small part of why many prefer to turn away and pretend it isn’t true at all. But acknowledge it we must, because ignoring it will only make the problem worse. All of us are affected by the lethal logic of abortion. A society that provides endorsement of abortion devalues the life of every single member as it allows mothers to destroy their children and sanctions violence against the most vulnerable members of the human community. Each of us enters life as being dependent upon our families and particularly on our mothers, and whilst our level of dependence fluctuates throughout our lives, we remain dependent on one another. A healthy society doesn’t deny or try to eliminate dependency; it helps people meet the needs of their neighbours and bear the burdens of each other.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Professional Risk & Public Liability Insurance

We often hear practitioners upset regarding the cost of premiums for Professional Risk and even Public Liability Insurance coverage.

How can we mitigate this??

we need to remember that the reason why we require professional risk and public liability is to give comfort to our customers.

We should never think of our insurance cover as being of benefit to the practitioner.

We need to do our job with such adeptness and skill that there shall be no reason for any party to make any claim.

Claims reductions will follow as reduced claims have a flow-on effect but I would suggest that as things stand with those involved in any part of the construction and building services industry, it shall take up to a decade to make this happen.
This is because of the deplorable state of design and installation of past construction which only now is being appropriately assessed.
Even then we are seeing continuance of non-conformance due to the obstructions placed upon building owners and assessors by local council regulators and this shall see further extended delays.

How it should happen.

Designers: The design team consists of the architect and accredited design engineering specialists for all relevant diciplines and under the oversight of a principal certifier. The designers shall provide concept drawings and specifications including concept safety in design.

Principal Certifiers: Review the concept design drawings and specification. It is essential that the principal certifier is confident in the design and designers.
The principal certifier will represent the schedule one building owner in applying for the development (DA).

Developer / Builder will appoint construction installers which may include in-house accredited engineers (or utilise the original specialist engineers) who may review the concept plans and specifications and provide for construction plans and specifications which must be reviewed and approved by the principal certifier.

Council Officers acting as agents for NSW Planning will assess the Development Application, advise neighbours and assess associated consequences as well as apply appropriate conditions to consent.

The Principal Certifier must, upon development approval, issue a construction certificate which will include the required fire safety schedule based upon the approved for construction plans and specification.
The Principal Certifier will advise the schedule when progress inspections must be conducted by the Principal Certifier (who may be assisted by the specialist design engineer) and must provide the necessary oversight that construction occurs as specified.
The Principal Certifier should vet the accreditation of design engineers and installers as well as that those involved have access to appropriate versions of the schedule referenced Australian Standards.

The Principal Certifier shall ensure that the building manual is progressively compiled and at this stage would include all concept documentation.

The Construction Installers must install as specified and after installation attend to and conduct any commissioning required to ensure that the installation reflects the performance requirements of the design. This commissioning should be witnessed by the accredited design engineer and it should be attested to by the design engineer and commissioning practitioner.
The construction installers shall add to the building manual the as-built drawings, specifications, asset register inclusive of dilapidation register, product test certificates, warranties & guarantees, maintenance / service requirements, commissioning data sheets, etc. and this building manual must be reviewed and accepted by the schedule one building owner prior to occupancy.
The Construction Installers must ensure that the Principal Certifier is aware of any and all known defects prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

The Principal Certifier must inspect and assess the building and deem it “safe to occupy” prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate (this does not mean that the building is fully conforming and without defect – but it does mean that any defects are minor, do not make occupancy unsafe and are expected to be addressed under DLP with Principal Certifier supervision).

At the end of DLP, the Principal Certifier will attest that it is appropriate for the release of any retention, or if all defects have not been addressed have these corrected drawing down upon the retention for funding.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Broken Building Schedules & Regulators/Certifiers in Denial

Yes – I do focus upon the inept building surveyors, but let’s not forget the equally inept fire engineers and installers, etc. who all constitute to this mess we’ve all inherited.

We are still constrained by an industry and Government regulators who advocate and accept that for existing buildings, Principal Certifiers can throw out the requirements of the building code of Australia as long as someone can make any plausible excuse as an offset.

We see no checks and balances applied to have any accountability (except for those new developments having a Class 2 component and where they are part of the 6% flagged for audit by the building commissioner). The Principal Certifiers are no longer effectively monitored by BPB and we would suggest that they never were anyway.

Whist there are a few diligent Principal Certifiers out there who do effectively fulfil their role, these are largely bypassed or castigated because they slow things up too much and elevate costs to correct non-compliances.

Most Principal Certifiers simply accept that any design with a report from a fire engineer, allows degradation of fire safety measures without any restoration of equity.
We recently had an example of a large warehouse which had the FER eliminate vehicle access referencing that if the warehouse was fitted with fire suppression this was ok. It then went on to offset the requirement for sprinkler suppression due to the height of the ceiling void.
Another example is a deemed warehouse built for a vehicle auctioneer where over 200 cars were stored, the FER claimed it as a warehouse so no sprinkler suppression (required for 40+ vehicles).
Another often found example is conceptual terms used within the fire safety schedule (this voids the validity of the schedule) such as an automatic fire detection system to AS1670.1 or fire alarm system to AS3786 may be installed.
Another is where the schedule has every year reference for the BCA as well as standards as the same year and there was never any of these standards versions with that year.
We’ve come across others where the solution was an unjustifiable opinion (Public grandstand reduced aisle and seatback spacing with reasoning that the occupants were all young and agile). How does this claptrap get through and accepted??

As a Principal Certifier, it is required that they shall be the entity who provides the Fire Safety Schedule for any development inclusive of relevant year version referencing and include that schedule with the construction certificate for any development.
Where the Principal Certifier does not have the expertise to provide any part of that schedule or where the performance requirements are not as prescribed, the Principal Certifier must be confident that the system will perform as designed by the qualified (/accredited) systems designer who shall remain accountable for that design.

The Principal Certifier is accountable for ensuring that the installers provide a build which reflects specifically the performance requirements and conformance requirements detailed and defined in the fire safety schedule. The Principal Certifier must receive and be satisfied by the evidence of performance and installation details and that that performance has been attested to.

The Principal Certifier must be provided with a disclosure of any and all observable non-conformances (defects) and only then may form the opinion that the building may be safe to occupy.

The Principal Certifier shall be provided with all baseline data (incl. as-builts, certificates, warranties, commissioning) associated with the project and review same prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Upon receipt of the Occupation Certificate, the regulator should review the fire safety schedule and query any anomalies prior to issuing the Fire Safety Schedule of Record.

The Role of the Accredited Practitioner Fire Safety:

The APFS checks that the measures listed on the Fire Safety Schedule exist and achieve the performance required of them.

Where the measure fails to perform, then the building owner is responsible to restore that performance to the required level.

Where the measure fails to exist, or the existence of unlisted measures, or where the fire safety schedule is inappropriate – the APFS should inform the regulator (Local Council) to take action.
It is not the role of the APFS to reconstitute the fire safety schedule, but rather the Council Building Surveyor.

Can we please all do our job??

Can AAC & AIBS do something about education and training to somehow get these Building Surveyors doing and understanding their job and hold those who don’t to account.
Similarly we see Engineers Australia and others doing nothing but collect membership fees when they are presented with clear evidence that members have breached their codes of practice and that their engineering is flawed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Understanding of a SARS / COVID Virus

We reflect that Engineers, Governments and Industry had learnt nor put very little planning in place from the 2003~2004 SAR’s Pandemic and Clive Broadbent F.IEAust, did extensive work and research in this field – especially in the focussed areas of infection control, ventilation and the need for negative pressure isolation for those infected. Similarly Associations such as ASHRE have identified control measures for virus and microbial controls in the built environments for decades.

We have recently seen calls to unseal buildings to induce increased outside air (this really should be condemned as it depressurises the immediate space and destroys the air balance of the HVAC system with consequences for other occupants.We have heard about classrooms wanting to put high efficiency filters in a corner of the room and again this is only effective as a placebo.Doing it right requires ventilation design and control of each space and unless compelled to do so by legislation, there is no incentive there for developers, builders, or even institutional property owners.

We need to understand what we are dealing with:
> Virus’ are structurally small and simple (you need an electron microscope to even see them).
> Virus’ are not micro-organisms as they are without cells, they have no metabolism – they are simply a piece of necloic acid wrapped in a protein and a surrounding membrane.
> They are powerful pathogens.
> They cannot reproduce on their own but must invade a hosting cell, take over that cell’s metabolism and instruct it to manufacture enzymes and new viral proteins. They then have cells continue to manufacture millions of replicants and at the same time block the synthesis of the host cells own DNA, RNA or proteins.
> The newly formed virus particles burst from the host cell and with respiratory virus’ – this means in the lung and from there it is transported by breath into the air where it can survive floating around in the right atmospheric conditions for days or contaminating a surface until a new host is found for it to infect by inhalation or physical contact. Similarly infection through the digestive tract with final output in urine and fecal matter.

We have learnt that these virus’ don’t survive in temperatures above 56degC (for 15min) but it is unlikely that building occupants would be too comfortable with blast furnace treatment for a quarter hour or that we could have systems which deliver this.

Can we mitigate virus transfer in our buildings?
but to fully do so we’d need to take the same precautions that are conducted for any virulent bio-lab.
Disrobe, Shower, re-robe in clean apparel, stick pads at portals with air-locks and continual negative pressure with all extracted and induced air filtered and scrubbed.

Vaccination produces the antigens needed to inhibit replication and is the most proficient method of reducing the risk of cross infection.
Masks do provide effective containment and face shielding does provide some protection to the wearer from entry into the eyes, etc.
These with good hygiene practices and social distancing, are the best method of management for normal day to day business operations.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

COVID Transmission

We are seeing a lot of hyperbola about how opening windows, using air filter sterilisers, etc. will eliminate or significantly mitigate the transmission of the COVID-19 virus and variants.
THIS IS FALSE and whilst these measures in some appropriate instances can reduce that transmission, careful thought regarding the design of these ventilation systems is essential.

We need to remember that this virus is a approx. 2 to 2.5 micron in size (so to see it would require you to use an electron microscope) and in still air can float about for about 20 hours. It has a smaller size than smoke particulates and will pass freely through medium to high efficiency filters and whilst it can be collected with HEPA filtration it may find cellular hosts also contained within that filter which may allow it to regenerate within the filter media itself, so such filters would need some form of sterilisation such as UV light in the appropriate frequency band. The other issue for HEPA filters are the significant pressure drop and this would mean that to put a HEPA filter on a domestic or light commercial grade air-handler would see fan pawer needing to be trebled to deliver the same number of air changes.

Good mechanically ventilated spaces require about 16 air changes / hour and distributed to supply and scavenge all parts of the room, so for a classroom or office 10m x 5m x 2.5m that is 125 cu.m. or allowing for furnishings and occupants – an airspace of 100,000 litres, so that’s 1,600,000 litres of air that needs to pass through the air handling unit / hour or about 450L/s. The airflow through the AHU needs to be about 3m/s to ensure that there isn’t excessive noise, allow reasonable thermal transfer over the cooling &/or heating coil as well as provide decent particulate filter capture.
Included in all of that would be the induced outside air component of up to 30 litres /second for each occupant.
If UV is used, it needs to be on the leading face of the filter and needs to be deep enough to ensure a kill rate of the virus by having sufficient timed exposure to the close proximity UV steriliser.

So will opening windows be beneficial?
> Definitely NOT in an air conditioned building. Opening a window can depressurise the space near the window and change the air distribution to the extent that other areas loose conditions. Also the Outside Air may have a lower CO2 level but otherwise is usually quite filthy (that’s why you should never call OA Fresh Air).
> Any space which has natural ventilation crossflow through windows etc. (with possibly ceiling fan assisting in air movement) needs to have a fairly low occupant density (approx 1 occupant / 20m2 or even less density).

So what about these stand alone recycling filters that the Victorian Government have just imported to go into the school classrooms?
> These units are more a placebo than an effective viral capture device. Whist they would capture some airborne particulates in the close vicinity of the unit, to be effective – they would need to be being run 24/7 and at not greater than a few metre spacing.
> BTW For me, I have a small fan assisted UV steriliser at my desk (but it only gives effective cover for about 1m2, so definitely deficient for a general office, reception area, etc.

So what should we be doing to provide the best ventilation?
> For new builds and retrofits, I’d think a form of humidity control is appropriate i.e. capacity to dry saturated air on rainy days and provide minimal drying during the dry winter months and using the humid return air to provide an unsustainable (to the virus) environmental airspace with a nominal 50% Relative Humidity (remember that the virus will stay live on a surface or floating in the air till it settles for a couple of days).
> Staged zoning from building entry to occupied space to minimise thermal differences yet provide effective thermal comfort.
> Don’t over occupy older buildings – most buildings built prior to the early 1990’s were designed for occupancy densities of 1 occupant / 15m2. Having occupancy densities of 1 occupant / 10m2 re the NCC/BCA means that many of these buildings require supplementary cooling but without sufficient diluting outside air make-up. This often results in excessive CO2 levels in the space and with recirculating airconditioning systems, all occupants in the zone irrespective of their own occupant to floorspace ratio, suffer with the same elevated CO2 levels.
> Every space needs to be reviewed by an experienced HVAC design engineer and verified or amended to suit the occupancy (inclusive of occupation, partitioning, air distribution, and any introduced hazards).

So what else should we do?
> Certainly the best thing we can do at this moment is to get vaccinated, practice hygiene (was hands, use sanitiser regularly), wear medical grade face masks, and practice social distancing.
> Continue with appropriate disinfection wipedown of all surfaces, including the supply air and return air terminal units (supply air registers develop a static charge which attracts particulates in the 2.5~10micron range).
> I shall be awaiting mandates regarding travel that staff and my fellow travellers are all fully vaccinated prior to using such means of transport and whist this may result in objections from others such as the unvaccinated – my response is that I will continue to respect the decision that these individuals have made, but by making that decision to remain unvaccinated – they are choosing to not associate with me or to occupy any shared space with me inclusive of transport facilities.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


  1. The Holy Bible is always the best reference source. Refer at least daily.
  2. Pray with your heart and never with your head.
  3. Never shake someone’s hand while you are in a seated position.
  4. Don’t enter a pool by the stairs
  5. Being the man at the BBQ is the closest thing to being king.
  6. In a negotiation, never make the first offer.
  7. Request the late check-out.
  8. When entrusted with a secret, keep it.
  9. Hold your heroes to a higher standard and emulate them.
  10. Return a borrowed car with a full tank of fuel, and in fact return anything you borrow in better condition than when you received it.
  11. Play with passion or not at all…
  12. When shaking hands, grip firmly and look them in the eye.
  13. Don’t let a wishbone grow where a backbone should be.
  14. If you need music on the beach, you’ve missed the whole point.
  15. Carry two handkerchiefs. The one in your back pocket is for you. The other one is for her.
  16. When you marry a girl, you marry her family.
  17. Be calm even if only on the surface.
  18. Experience the serenity and joy of traveling alone.
  19. Never be afraid to ask out that girl (unless already committed, and then DON’T even think about it).
  20. Thank a digger. Then try to make it up to them by living the life they fought for.
  21. Eat lunch with the new kid.
  22. After writing an angry email, read it carefully, read it again – Then delete it.
  23. Ask your mother to play. She won’t let you win. 
  24. Manners maketh the man – live it..
  25. Give credit. Take the blame and don’t publicly chastise.
  26. Stand up to Bullies. Protect those bullied.
  27. Forgive and only remember to protect, not to use as future leverage.
  28. Always protect your siblings (and teammates).
  29. Be confident and humble at the same time.
  30. Call and visit your parents and grandparents often. They miss you.
  31. The healthiest relationships are those where you’re a team; where you respect, protect, and stand up for each other
  32. Your Dad will always love you, even when you’re rotten.
  33. The name father is a reflection of God the Father – when you are- reflect Him.
  34. When / if you have children and grandchildren – remember that they are precious and placed in your care by God. Delight in them often.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

NSW D&BP Act & Regulation:

This year’s most talked about Act in NSW has now come into effect, it has been met with complacency, scepticism, criticism, reluctance and a great many questions by the construction industry with the changes it brings. But it is here to stay.

Since the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW) (“Act”) and the Design & Building Practitioners Regulations 2021 (NSW) (“Regulations”) came into effect progressively from July 2020 and July 2021, design, engineering and building practitioners working on Class 2 buildings inclusive of any building with a Class 2 part, have had this raft of new legislative obligations placed upon them from a required duty of care, to who is classified as a “registered design practitioner”, and minimum standards for “regulated designs” within each category of design, to a new “design compliance declaration” regime. This is before we even start to take a look at the project consultancy agreement with the embedded contractual obligations contained within it.

Perhaps, like all change, it is more daunting in its infancy, than it actually is once we grow accustomed to and accommodate it into due process.

Whist most design and engineering practitioners have likely been already performing their designated roles for services tin accordance with these legislative requirements already in reflection of the requirements of the National Construction Code with the performance and specifying the installation detail requirements of the nominated referenced standards and secondary referenced standards. Such design should ensure that such should ensure a safe, efficient, defect free building which is fill for the purpose for which it was conceived.

Having said this, design and engineering practitioners do need to make themselves fully aware of all the obligations under the Act and Regulations in order to properly and wholly comply with them. For some, this may be unnerving, but there are a number of useful and informative resources available to help navigate through the changes and requirements brought about by the Act and Regulations.

If you are involved in Design and this has a Class 2 Part, then you must be registered. The FPAA offered existing practitioners  transitional accreditation which runs from 1st July 2021 which expires on 31st December 2021 in which time such practitioners are given time to seek the ordained qualifications commensurate with the constraints nominated for such designs.

Just because someone is a Professional Engineer (NER) in say mechanical engineering, will not provide automatic endorsement for sophisticated smoke hazard management designs and Fire Engineers will no longer to provide smoke hazard management designs unless these designs are endorsed by an accredited in that level of smoke control, Mechanical Engineer (who has been examined to verify their expertise in such smoke control systems). This shall be similar for other services.

It is a NSW Government Requirement that a register be readily available without access restriction for all such Accredited Fire Systems Designers and this shall provide details of the individual designer as well as the details of their professional indemnity and public liability insurance associated with the provision of design services as well as the discipline specialty or specialties for each accredited designer and limitation grading for practitioners.

We understand that this shall progressively rolled out over time to include Class 3 to Class 9 buildings and we understand that a number of Building Principal Certifiers are now requiring this registration (or as a minimum NER when no Class 2) for all new projects.

I would suggest that anyone involved in the Concept, Advice, Design, Installation, Commissioning, and Assessment of Design Performance post construction – should ensure that they and those who go before and after them are appropriately accredited where required.

Let us also not forget:

  • That installers are obliged to inform the Principal Certifier of any observable defects (prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate).
  • that no Occupation Certificate may be issued unless the Building Manual has been completed and approved (EP&A Act-1979 6.27),
  • that the Occupation Certificate alone is the trigger for the commencement of Defect Liability Period – So until OC is registered, Defect Liability is open‑ended.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Fire Safety Assessment & Fire Systems Design NSW Accreditation Update

From the Fire Protection Association of Australia who currently are the accreditation body for Fire Safety Assessment and Fire Safety System Design.
Fire Safety Assessment & Fire Systems Design NSW Accreditation Update

In 2017, the NSW Government amended the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the Regulation) to require the endorsement of fire systems designs and performance to be carried out by competent practitioners.  

This change was in line with private certification views of the Independent Review of the Building Professionals Act 2005 (the Lambert Report), which considered the “approach to the regulation of the design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of fire safety system” to be “a major deficiency” in need of urgent reform. 

It was always the NSW Government’s intent that an industry-based accreditation authority would be approved to accredit practitioners. On 1 July, 2020, Fire Protection Association Australia (FPA Australia) was recognised as an accreditation authority by the NSW Department of Customer Service. The announcement by the NSW Secretary recognised FPA Australia for Fire Safety Assessment (FSA) and Fire Systems Design (FSD).  

NSW FSA and FSD practitioners can be recognised through a Transitional pathway until 30 June 2021 after which only the Qualified pathway for accreditation will apply.  

Who is affected by this change?
Fire Safety Assessment and Fire Systems Design Practitioners operating in New South Wales only, this change applies to:
Practitioners who currently hold Transitional Accreditation
Practitioners who are currently undertaking assessment for Transitional Accreditation; and
Persons who are wishing to become accredited through the Fire Protection Accreditation Scheme  

What does this mean for you? 
From 1 July, 2021, the Transitional Accreditation pathway for NSW FSA and FSD will no longer be available and all new applicants MUST meet the Qualified Accreditation requirements. The Qualified Accreditation pathway will be the ONLY pathway available to applicants from that date.   

FPA Australia is encouraging all practitioners operating in NSW to complete the Transitional Accreditation for NSW FSA and/or FSD by 11.59pm on 30 June, 2021.  If you have not applied, or are yet to finish, we recommend you complete the Transitional pathway as soon as practically possible.   

Practitioners who hold a Transitional Accreditation for NSW FSA or FSD will have a period of four years dating either from the day they were accredited or 1 July, 2020, whichever is the later to meet the Qualified criteria, as detailed in the Fire Protection Accreditation Scheme (FPAS)  

Please refer to the relevant links below to understand what the criteria for the Qualified Accreditation pathway will be:
Fire Systems Design
Fire Safety Assessment  

We are aware that existing practitioners operating in NSW conducting FSA and FSD work may not have a direct correlation to qualifications identified in the matrix, these circumstances will be considered on a case by case basis.  

What are the benefits?
In NSW a practitioner is unable to sign off on measures they are not accredited for and through the Fire Safety Assessment (FSA) and Fire Systems Design (FSD) Accreditation model, industry (rather than Government) is demonstrating its competence and providing certainty to clients and other stakeholders in the fire protection industry.

This is part of a national discussion about the recognition of skills and qualifications, and we see the recognition of the Fire Safety Assessment (FSA) and Fire Systems Design (FSD) Accreditation categories as a model that can be picked up effectively by other states and territories. 
All other fire protection roles are unaffected by this change.  

What’s changing and why you need to know about the changes?
FPA Australia will cease ALL assessments being undertaken through Transitional Accreditation for the NSW Fire Safety Assessment and Fire Systems Design pathway from 11.59pm on 30 June, 2021 with the Qualified Accreditation pathway taking effect from 1 July, 2021.   

It’s important to understand that FPA Australia is unable to allow a person to become accredited through the Transitional Accreditation for either the NSW FSA or FSD pathways from 1 July 2021 onwards, and assessments will automatically close at 11.59pm on 30 June, 2021.   

If you are part way through an online assessment of a Fire Safety Measure at that time, you will be unable to complete the requirements and will be required to gain Accreditation through the Qualified Pathway.  

All new applicants must apply through the Qualified Accreditation pathway from 1 July, 2021, for NSW FSA and/or FSD.   

Frequently Asked Questions and Scenarios
To ensure we are communicating the right messages to all relevant stakeholders please submit your questions to including your mobile number, so that FPA Australia can contact you for clarification, if required.  FPA Australia will be running face to face information sessions (where applicable) and webinars to ensure that everyone can understand the process and ask questions.  

We understand that you may have questions that have not been answered in the content above, we will endeavour to update our Scenarios and Frequently Asked Questions to ensure the message is communicated to all relevant stakeholders.  

Please feel free to forward this information onto your colleagues who may be impacted by the change in the Fire Protection Accreditation Scheme (FPAS) pathway to become an Accredited Practitioner in New South Wales.  

Kind Regards  
Amanda Hogarth
National Manager Accreditation
Accreditation & Licensing
Fire Protection Association Australia

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Men Meeting the Challenge Conference 2020

Men Meeting the Challenge | Newsletter October 2020
Men Meeting the Challenge Conference
Saturday 7th November 2020

I Have Never Done This Before

Richard Bolton
Chairman & Conference Convenor, Men For Christ Ministries -writes:

Life has dramatically changed in 2020. However, our need for being fortified by God’s Word, through fellowship with our Christian Brothers, has never been greater.

While our revamped online 2020 Men Meeting the Challenge Conference has changed from being a large single gathering to being individuals or smaller groups, regardless of wherever you may be, it does not change the fact that we are all one in Christ.

Earlier this week I was thrown by an email from a brother in the Lord who is doing his bit to organise a group of 50 men to meet on the 7th November 2020 in the ACT. It is through the craziness of 2020 that I am now realising that our single gathering, that has met each year for the last 16 years, is this year going to gather men from all over the country.

It was only yesterday, on the mobile, that I was speaking about how we could connect with our brothers, who are in isolation throughout Victoria. Wouldn’t it be great if men in isolation, wherever they might be, could tune in on the 7th November to be fortified by God’s Word; truth that remains constant regardless of our current situation.

Please continue to pray for our organising committee and join with us by sharing this newsletter as we promote this year’s online Men Meeting the Challenge Conference.

And as you gather on the 7th November, remember, whether or not you are watching online solo, or as a small group of men (adhering to the COVID-safe requirements) that you are not alone, you are part of a larger group of men who are all one in Christ.
Hear a promo from our Keynote Speakers for 2020
Help us spread the word Can you take a couple of minutes to encourage each other and promote MMC2020?  What about heading to our Facebook Page and posting an encouraging message and share the page (you can see what Andrew from the Illawarra shared).

Or maybe forward this email to a Christian mate.    

Registration is easy     
Online:   $10 

Visit our website click on “Register” and follow the prompts.

Pay with Direct Deposit or Credit Card via PayPal (you don’t need a PayPal account) or  Your PayPal account     Meet our Briefing Panel and Breakout Speakers

Martyn Iles – Australian Christian Lobby
Martyn has operated a church youth ministry with disadvantaged teenagers and worked in a top-tier commercial law firm. He is currently the Managing Director of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL). The ACL is one of Australia’s largest lobby groups, desiring a compassionate, just and moral society through having the public contribution of the Christian faith reflected in the political life of the nation.
David Robertson – City Bible Forum
David is the Director of Third Space – an evangelistic project with City Bible Forum.  He was a Presbyterian pastor in Scotland for 33 years.  He is married and they have three children and four grandchildren.  David is an author, broadcaster and a prolific blogger at The Wee Flea.

Tony Payne – Campus Bible Study (UNSW)
Tony is one of Australia’s best-known Christian writers. He is the author of Fatherhood, The Thing Is, The Trellis and the Vine, and more than 30 other books and ministry resources. He is a Ministry Trainer and Writer in Residence with Campus Bible Study at UNSW. He is married, and along with his wife they have five adult children and six grandchildren

Grant Borg – MBM South West Sydney
Grant is the Campus Pastor of MBM in South West Sydney – an almost 3-year-old Church Plant out of MBM in Rooty Hill. Grant is at home talking to people about Jesus and a more natural evangelist than he is a Pastor. He is married, has 3 young kids and is most at rest in the Aussie outback. 
Resources online Promotional Video Talks from past conferences (including 2019) Posters, Sign-up Sheet & Bible Studies
Bible Study  Bible Study 2: 2 Corinthians 5:17-21

17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. 21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. What has God done for us? Does being a “new creation” mean that we are now perfect? What task or position has God committed us to? How can people be reconciled to God? Is there one person you can tell the good news of reconciliation to this week?

Leaders notes available online here, and at

Prayer Corner

We continue with the request for prayer. We are confident that the Lord answers prayer, so please pray for God’s guidance for this year’s conference. In particular That the Steering Committee will pray & reflect on God’s word concerning preparations for this conference. That God is preparing men to come; that their hearts will be challenged, & through obedience, they will allow
the Holy Spirit to change them to be Men of God.  
update subscription preferences 
Ian Childs writes:
If possible I would love to have the fellowship of men who were going to attend the 2020 Hunter Men’s Convention se this as an opportunity to continue to be infused by Bible teaching which can be applied to our daily lives.

If this cannot be hosted at GECN on the 7th November 2020 in the Auditorium, then I would love you to fill our home to COVID restricted capacity (so we can have up to 20 guests) and that any spill over can be sorted at other venues. If you need sponsoring to attend, please advise as I had pre-booked for attending the conference at Kings Parramatta and so with Trevor & Myles have pre-paid for 16 where there is but the 3 of us.


Ian Childs

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment