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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (6 November) . . Page.. 3779 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

(5) In this section -

`AA rating' has the same meaning as in SAA MP64, entitled `Manual of Assessment Procedure for Water Efficient Appliances', published by or on behalf of the Standards Association of Australia, as amended from time to time.".

Mr Speaker, this amendment is modelled on a similar provision in the Victorian residential tenancy legislation. We have spoken to tenants and landlords about this proposal also and they are comfortable about it. We have also spoken to the department in Victoria which administers this legislation and they report that there have been no difficulties with implementing it.

What we are asking is that, when an appliance, fitting or fixture that uses or supplies water has to be replaced in a rental property, it must be replaced with an appliance or fitting of at least an AA standard. This is an Australian Standards Association standard, which obviously makes it very enforceable. The water efficient appliances standard applies to showerheads, dishwashers, clothes washers, urinals, water tap outlets and toilet suites. These appliances, fittings and fixtures are stocked around Canberra. BBC Hardware, for example, stocks only the most water efficient shower roses.

As with energy, tenants have little or no control over the efficiency of water or energy in rental properties. As legislators, I believe we have a responsibility to come up with practical ways in which we can help alleviate this problem, as well as obviously help protect the environment. As all members are aware, we live on a very dry continent and water conservation is an extremely important issue. I commend this amendment to the Assembly.

MS REILLY (6.09): Mr Speaker, listening to Ms Tucker speak now, I realise that I spoke on issues relating to water earlier, which shows the great efficiency of this process. The arguments I put forward earlier still apply, and we will be supporting this amendment.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (6.09): I will be opposing the amendment, for much the same reason as before. It is often the case, Mr Speaker, that a landlord might have more than one property, or might have a home that he lives in elsewhere in the city, and may wish to replace an appliance which has broken down with a secondhand appliance. It is often difficult to find a secondhand appliance which carries that AA rating. So we are requiring, in effect, that the landlord go off and buy new goods to replace the ones that might have to be replaced, and that might be inequitable in some cases.

I might correct Ms Tucker on one thing. She says this scheme operates in Victoria. That is not quite true. The scheme in Victoria requires replacement of fixtures and appliances with an A rated appliance, not with an AA rated appliance. So there is a slightly higher order of costs associated with this scheme. I think the principle is still one that, again, ought not to be applied just to the rental market but ought to be applied across the board to the rest of the community if we believe this is important.

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