Page 2817 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Industry groups have told the opposition that the private certification process is now nearly unworkable and in desperate need of review. However, they have stated that the bill we are debating today is just another example of the government going off with its own agenda, perhaps to the detriment of the industry.
Industry groups share the opposition’s concern that some of the amendments in this bill may end up being more red tape to an already convoluted and complex process, and may indeed further discourage people who in fact do the right thing. The challenge, like so many laws and regulations, will be in implementation. If the authorities are reasonable, then the concerns will largely be allayed.
The bill amends the eligibility requirements for registered architects to allow qualifications to be prescribed by regulation and accredited by notifiable instrument. This will provide certainty about the recognition of architectural qualifications across jurisdictions. However, concerns have been raised by industry about the capacity of the registrar to make an assessment of what is an appropriate qualification without consulting the industry first.
The bill prescribes a formal notification of completion of a stage of building works. Notification must be in writing, dated with a notification date, and include statements the relevant stage was reached and the work was in accordance with the plans. While it is important that notification of completion is provided, it is not clear how these requirements will be met. Members of the building industry have informed me that they are yet to be informed about what will satisfy the requirements. They have also raised concerns about the requirement to state that the work was carried out in accordance with the approved plans. I have been informed that it is very rare for work to be strictly in accordance with the plans. Therefore, what discretion will ACTPLA be applying?
The bill contains significant amendments to the way in which licences are granted and renewed. The bill includes provisions that will allow the registrar to refuse to issue a licence on various grounds, including prior occupational discipline. This allows the registrar to consider issues other than mere qualifications when deciding whether to grant a licence.
The bill also allows the registrar to place restrictions on a licence and refuse to renew a licence. The ability to refuse renewal means that the registrar does not have to rely on the disciplinary system to ensure that those licensees who are likely to be a risk to the community do not continue to work as certifiers. However, the opposition does express some reservations about the implementation of this authority. We want to ensure that the power given to the registrar is not abused.
The amendments in this bill also mean that the registrar can deal with a situation in which the applicant, director, partner or nominee of the group that tries to apply for a licence is prohibited from providing a construction service. The registrar is now able to refuse to grant a licence in this situation.
The bill increases the registrar’s information-gathering powers. At present, only physical documents can be accessed. As most information held by licensees is held in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video