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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 04 Hansard (Thursday, 1 April 2004) . . Page.. 1551 ..

The jurisdictions that have one or both definitions use them in different ways. In the Western Australian and Queensland models, their equivalents of “unsatisfactory professional conduct” are only one ground for disciplinary action. In Victoria, “unsatisfactory professional conduct” is when the registered architect does not comply with a disciplinary action imposed by the tribunal.

The New South Wales definition of “unsatisfactory professional conduct” is, in fact, the disciplinary grounds defined in this bill. Clearly it would be beneficial for there to be agreement on those definitions, as the architectural profession is a very mobile work force. Architects often work between jurisdictions and no doubt ACT based architects will face the same issues when working in other jurisdictions that do not have an identical act to ours. However, each jurisdiction has their own way of describing what actions are unacceptable in relation to the conduct of architects.

If all jurisdictions agree that a definition of either or both terms is necessary and agree on what the definitions should be and how they are applied, I am sure the government would be happy to amend the bill and the act, once it is passed, to include these definitions. However, I believe the information I have just indicated to members makes it clear that we are a long way from that point and that the existing provisions are more appropriate, transparent and consistent with the principles of harmonisation.

On a final point in relation to the issue of violence which Mrs Dunne raised, I am advised that this particular issue of violence, if you like, is only relevant insofar as it is relevant to their practice as an architect. Say there is a matter of violence between an architect and a client, then clearly that is potentially an issue of unprofessional conduct of some type and it is therefore relevant to have it included.

MRS DUNNE (5.40): I thank the minister for that clarification. I think it is very important and needs to be amplified—because this debate has extrinsic material—that this reference to violence is in relation to an architect’s professional duty and not to their private life outside their business life. That is a welcome clarification.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 42 agreed to.

Clauses 43 to 66, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Proposed new clause 66A.

MS TUCKER (5.41): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name which inserts a new clause 66A [see schedule 3 at page 1614].

This amendment requires the architects board to report annually to the minister under the Annual Reports (Government Agencies) Act 2004. This ensures greater transparency and accountability than would otherwise be provided.

MR CORBELL (Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (5.41): The government will be supporting this amendment and Ms Tucker’s amendment No 3 that provides

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