Page 3160 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 18 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
value of all materials in a building section plus air spaces, or it can be the insulation value of a particular material. The recommended insulation requirements for the ACT have been calculated according to the local climate and are as follows: Ceilings, a minimum R value of 3.4; walls, a minimum R value of 1.7; and floors, a minimum R value of 1.0. The saving in energy terms that can be expected from this level of insulation, assuming a 20-degree temperature differential, is 18.25 kilowatts per hour. This represents not only a significant saving in energy consumption but also a huge saving for consumers, who would recover the added insulation costs of their homes within approximately two to three years.
The Bill being presented today will ensure an extra potential 46 per cent improvement on energy conservation over Mr Connolly's regulation saving of 29 per cent energy loss through walls only. So we are talking about an extra 46 per cent over and above the regulations being suggested by Mr Connolly, and that is made up of 26 per cent through ceilings and a further 20 per cent through floors. We cannot afford to just sit with the soft option suggested by the Minister on this issue. The public have been encouraged to insulate their homes for many years now, with the result that the level of insulation is inadequate and the cost of heating of an average home in environmental terms is really crippling for many, particularly those who can least afford it.
We cannot on the one hand commend and applaud the builders of houses that rate well in an energy audit, disparage those that do not, and not take action available to us to ensure that houses are constructed with integrity when we can so easily do it. If we are serious about the responsible use and conservation of energy in the ACT and if we are serious about providing homes that are cheaper to maintain, I believe that the minimum R rated insulation requirements that I propose in this Bill, making it compulsory for all builders to comply, is a step in the right direction. In tabling this Bill I recognise the bipartisan approach that has been taken on the Prostitution Bill and on the Electoral Bill. I suggest to the Ministers, Mr Wood and Mr Connolly, that since our intentions are similar perhaps it is time to sit down again in the same way with the Liberals, Ms Szuty, and Mr Stevenson if he wishes, and to confer and see whether we can agree on what will be in the best interests of the environment and the people of Canberra.
Debate (on motion by Mr Connolly) adjourned.
REMAND CENTRES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
MS SZUTY (10.42): Madam Speaker, I present the Remand Centres (Amendment) Bill 1992.
Title read by Clerk.
MS SZUTY: Madam Speaker, I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Madam Speaker, I present the Remand Centres (Amendment) Bill 1992 to offer a solution to a problem that has existed for some time at the Belconnen Remand Centre. The passing of this amendment Bill by the ACT Legislative Assembly will also have national implications in that this legislation may well be the forerunner of similar legislation in other States and the Northern Territory.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .