The debate over secondary suites and large homes has caught fire, with much of the Vancouver-based media actually paying attention to how Surrey residents and politicians are grappling with this issue.

Of course, the issue goes far beyond Surrey, but there have been some peculiar aspects to Surrey’s handling of illegal suites and large homes. One thing that has come out in the widespread coverage is that lawsuits against more than 70 homeowners whose homes were considered illegal and unsafe were dropped just in time for the last election.

In addition, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, which represents civic workers, says its members are not being backed by senior management and council when they attempt to point out deficiencies after a home inspection. The union has also stated the city is turning a blind eye to some building matters.

These charges are serious. It is imperative any city enforce its own bylaws and, in the case of building inspection, the provincial building code, imperfect as it is.

We need look no further than the whole leaky condo debacle to see what happens when the code doesn’t properly address issues such as overhangs and vapour barriers. In that case, inspectors enforced a poorly-written code and people who bought such homes paid a very big price.

Surrey has an excellent program, spearheaded by fire Chief Len Garis, to force electrical inspections of homes that consume a lot of power.

One of the reasons this program is so important is that often electrical systems have been haphazardly and dangerously altered, leading to very high risk of fire and other calamity.

Do the same concerns not apply to the thousands of illegal suites that have been built in homes, after they have passed inspection?

Why would Surrey be reluctant to follow up on concerns raised by its own inspectors?

The city is leaving itself wide open to some very big liability awards if it can be shown that it is not conducting complete inspections and abiding by the rules.

There is no question this is a tough question for politicians to deal with. But they are elected to make tough decisions, and sometimes those decisions aren’t going to make some supporters happy.

The City of Surrey has the statutory duty to ensure any new or remodelled building is safe to occupy. That’s the bottom line. If it has slapped a stop-work order on a property, that does not mean it can be ignored. It means that the deficiencies must be corrected.

Housing development is the number one economic activity in Surrey. It has enabled many people to make a lot of money. There’s nothing wrong with that – that’s how a free-market system works. But they must do so while abiding to both the letter and spirit of the law, and those who enforce the law must be able to do so without fear or favour.

It is essential the mayor and council make a clear and unequivocal statement that no one is above the law, and that civic workers will be backed completely in the performance of their duties.

That does not mean their decisions should not be challenged on occasion – they will not always be right. But they must be free to make decisions, and not called off the job because of a concern that their decisions won’t be popular.