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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 299 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

As I said, under the new bill there will be only one payment. This arrangement will be discussed at a ministerial council meeting so I would urge the minister to ensure that only one payment is applicable right across the country. I am advised by the department that that should only be $650, so there might be some good news down the track. I am also advised that the fees which will have to be paid initially are actually those payable now. This will happen regardless of what is contained in this bill, so the position at present has not been made any worse.

The ministerial meeting, which I understand is a meeting of security regulators, is to be held in March in Hobart. I think whoever goes to that meeting should push the fact that we want to see only one fee. I notice that the departmental officer and even Mr Gosling are nodding, and that is good to see because I think this will help the industry. As I indicated earlier, New South Wales is to have a statutory review in June.

I note the comments that have been made by Mr Newham. He is part of a family of very experienced locksmiths who have done a lot for and are very good citizens of the territory. I am certainly happy to put those remarks on the record, and I think we need to take their views very seriously.

We will certainly be monitoring the effect of this legislation. Overall, the bill is sensible and it brings us into line nationally. There have been some problems and I am well aware of the finely balanced arguments we considered some years ago when this was first looked at as to whether we should go down the path of a code or a bill. The opposition will be supporting the bill.

MS DUNDAS (12.01): Mr Speaker, this bill introduces a statutory licensing regime for the security industry covering lock and alarm installers, bodyguards, cash transport, crowd control and security guards. All other jurisdictions have had licensing regimes in place for at least a few years, so this will bring us in line with the other states. I understand that there have been five codes of conduct governing the industry since 1998, but that these do not cover everything that this bill does.

I also understand that members of this Assembly have been approached by locksmiths who have requested that we oppose this bill. I have carefully considered their concerns and I will briefly outline them. Firstly, locksmiths were unhappy that two sets of fees are being charged for operating in both the ACT and New South Wales. I am satisfied that the ACT government is attempting to address this concern by pushing for a national licensing scheme for members of the security industry. In the interim, licence fees for the ACT will actually drop under this new regime.

Secondly, the locksmiths were unhappy that builders and carpenters will continue to be permitted to install locks and alarms in commercial buildings and new residences. I understand that they take the view that if the security industry is to be regulated, no security work should be done by a person who is not licensed to do this work.

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