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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Tuesday, 9 March 2004) . . Page.. 926 ..

However, I encourage Mrs Dunne to pursue the idea. Maybe we need to make changes to the development or the building approval process. Maybe sustainability and design management issues could be dealt with in this way. While there is certainly scope to deal with additional sustainability issues in planning and building, I do not think the amendments that Mrs Dunne has put forward are appropriate at this point.

MRS DUNNE (4.57): I have to say, Mr Speaker, that I am disappointed—and I can count—that members are not prepared to take a step further and really embrace the notion of sustainability. While I applaud Ms Tucker for her initiative, I think it is sadly narrow. Although we will be supporting her amendment we would rather see a much wider initiative.

I was troubled to hear the minister say, “Oh, well, this is carried out under the plumbing act and this is happening under HQSD.” We have a whole lot of silos where people do not talk to one another. This is the whole problem with the concept of putting forward the building industry and wanting it to lead by example. There is a long way to go.

Ms Tucker is right when she says the ACT does not practice environmental sustainability as well as it might. The building industry is one of the areas where I think we fall down particularly. This industry is not sufficiently innovative and does not look for better and smarter ways to do these things.

Recognising that my amendments will go down, I plead with members and the government as graciously as I can to consult and find ways to ensure that in future we come up with a set of sustainability guidelines that address and meet a greater need in the community. There is a need beyond the issue of rainforest timbers. There are issues in relation to the amount of embedded energy in a whole range of materials that we use in building our homes, our offices and our commercial buildings. But none of these issues has yet been addressed, and I think that is something that this minister and this Assembly need to take on notice.

MR SPEAKER: The question is that Mrs Dunne’s amendments be agreed to.

Amendments negatived.

MR SPEAKER: The question now is that Ms Tucker’s amendment be agreed to.

Amendment agreed to.

At 5.00 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.

Clause 30, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 31 to 134, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 135.

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