Page 1280 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 25 March 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
not yet happened. So I assume the situation is that the ratings of houses for sale will use the old first-generation software, as the minister said that it is not proposed to change the rating tool.
This means that the government is planning to have a system where one rating tool is used for new houses and one rating tool is used for old houses or houses which are resold. As the two tools do not always give the same results and there will be no support for the old tool, this is definitely not a good situation. It is a recipe, at the very least, for confusion. Given the situation with the first-generation software, it is just not viable as a long-term solution.
This is an important issue. Only a few thousand new houses are built each year in the ACT, while the existing stock of houses must exceed 150,000. Many more existing houses are sold each year than new houses. I am not here today to tell the government what the technical solution to this problem is. It needs to urgently consult with the energy assessors and the real estate community as to the most practical and effective solution to the problem. One additional complication in this consultation is that the ratings for existing buildings for sale are generally organised by real estate agents as part of the sales process, whereas the ratings for new buildings to be built are organised by the architects or the builder—a different part of the profession.
Some assessors have suggested to me that because an assessment using the second-generation software will be more expensive than that using the first-generation software, there will be resistance to using it for existing houses. It has been suggested that, to overcome this problem, there could be a simplified checklist-type approach. This could well provide useful information to a potential purchaser of a house about how they could improve their home, but it is hard to see how it could be made compatible with new house energy ratings.
Whatever the solution is, it must be found quickly so that the industry and the public who use the ratings can know what is going on. I would like to see an information piece regularly in Saturday’s real estate section and on real estate websites which explains to the public what is happening with the energy rating system and what it means in general.
In conclusion, energy efficiency ratings are very important and they need to be accurate. However, the government is not doing any auditing to protect the integrity of the system and ensure the accuracy of the ratings. New software is going to end up requiring changes to the system that we use to rate existing houses, but unfortunately the government has not yet done the consultation and information process with the industry and consumers to tell them what the changes will be.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Planning and Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation) (12.07): I thank the member for raising this matter and for her ongoing interest in the energy efficiency rating of houses in the territory. There is no doubt, Mr Speaker, that this is an important issue for the local community. However, it is my sad duty to advise the Assembly that there are a number of misconceptions in the member’s motion which undoubtedly need further clarification before I believe the Assembly can properly consider the intent of the member’s motion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .