Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (6 November) . . Page.. 3775 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

I agree with Mr Humphries that if one house is better designed than another, and they know the impact that that will have on their costs in living in that house, they may indeed choose the second house if they are made aware in advance that one of them has a better energy rating. The issue is an accountability issue for this Assembly, for this parliament. Why do we continue in ACT Housing to have houses which are below standard, which are ill conceived and which are actually quite primitive in terms of the climate that we live in? It is about raising an awareness and it is about changing the way that we live in this city.

Mr Moore said that he felt it was an imposition because he had not done it himself, and he would not impose it on anyone else. We are not imposing huge costs for actually making houses energy efficient. We are enabling consumers with information which, as I said in my initial speech, I think is pretty fundamental to a consumer society. Consumers like to have full information. All this is is providing information. I do not hear complaints because when you buy a house or you rent a house you get information about how sound the structure is. When you buy a house you have to get a building inspection. You have to know that it is sound. What this is suggesting is that it is just as important, it is a matter of priority, that when you buy that house you know what the energy rating is. That is just as important as whether it is sound or not. Obviously, other members here do not agree with that, but that is what we are saying. We should be at that level of awareness if we are really seriously concerned about bringing our buildings up to scratch in terms of energy efficiency.

I accept that I do not have the support of sufficient members here, although Mr Osborne has not said a word. I might call for a division and see what he says. I would like to conclude by saying that, as Mr Moore said, we have put some other proposed legislation with the drafters, and I am pleased to hear that he may be more supportive when he looks at that legislation. I look forward to further debates on this matter.

Question put:

That the amendment (Ms Tucker's) be agreed to.

The Assembly voted -

	AYES, 7	 		NOES, 8

	Mr Berry		Mr Cornwell
	Ms Horodny		Mr Hird
	Ms McRae		Mr Humphries
	Ms Reilly		Mr Kaine
	Ms Tucker		Mrs Littlewood
	Mr Whitecross		Mr Moore
	Mr Wood			Mr Osborne
				Mr Stefaniak

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .