There is insufficient…

There is insufficient justification for imposing a BC-like regime in Ontario. Most of the problems I have observed are with drawings submitted by BCIN holders, not engineers or architects.

The BC regime adds cost and time to the development process, reduces the responsibility of the design professions and did nothing to stop the leaky condo debacle.

The BCIN exams would better protect the public if the tested comprehension of the building code rather than how to use the index and table of contents.

The real problem (as it was before Bill 124) lies with the Planning Act. Fix the front end. Leave the building permit process alone.

Referring to Grenfell is fearmongering. The codes and material testing processes are very different here than in Britain, including the requirement for two exit stairs, not just one.

Without minimizing the tragedy of Elliot Lake, it stands alone. What has happened since? It was designed and built a generation ago and suffered decades of abuse due to inadequate maintenance. Some of the buildings built to last 6 months for Expo '67 are still in operation because they were well maintained. The problem is not with the design (and building codes are much improved since '67), but with the maintenance. Mandate improved maintenance if you want to avoid a recurrence of Elliot Lake.

Put the Interior Designers under the Architects Act and give them a protected scope of work, and you will significantly reduce the administrative authority's workload.

It is incongruous that anything larger than 600 m2 requires architects and engineers to design it except for houses. Anyone can design a house of any size, even 20,000 sq.ft. (1,800 m2) or larger. Make large houses safer by requiring design by an architect and engineers. It won't affect the standard home builder since most homes are less than 6,400 sq.ft. (600 m2). Anyone who can afford a home large than 6,400 sq.ft. can afford professional design.