Page 747 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 8 April 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I very much hope that the Assembly sees sense and respects licensees and the role of ACAT in administering justice and supports these amendments.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for Workplace Safety and Industrial Relations and Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development) (11.59): The government cannot agree to these amendments for the reasons that I foreshadowed earlier, and I will go into some more detail shortly. It is important to stress that what Mr Coe is saying is that members of the public are not entitled to know when they look at a builder’s licence, for example, that the builder has a matter before the ACAT. This is an incongruous argument because matters that go to the ACAT are already on the public record in the lists published of ACAT matters and hearings.
Why should we say to consumers, “Well, you can find out just by looking at the ACAT,” when they are thinking about engaging a builder? Why should we ask them to do that? Why should it not just be on the register when the consumer looks up the builder’s licence number? Why should they not just go there and say, “Okay, this is the builder. This is the builder’s occupational discipline history. By the way, the registrar currently has a matter in relation to this builder before the ACAT”?
Mr Coe seems to be saying. “No, that shouldn’t be on the licence, but, you know, if you look in the filing cabinet on level 3 of where the ACAT sits you might find out that the builder is currently being taken to the ACAT.” That is not friendly to consumers. That is not helpful to consumers and it is not fair disclosure to consumers. We say matters in relation to occupational discipline that are taken to the ACAT should be disclosed on the builder’s licence and that it should be on the register that people are able to view. Why should consumers not know? If it is already a matter of public record that the registrar has an application before the ACAT, why should that not be noted on the register? Simple as that. The government does not support Mr Coe’s amendment in relation to that matter.
The second amendment proposed by Mr Coe would mean that conditions placed on the person through licensing under sections 21 and 21A would be available immediately but others under section 56 would not. Again, this seems to be a little contradictory. Conditions are already published where they place a limitation on the operation of a licensee, and that limitation is effective immediately until otherwise removed by the registrar or by decision of the ACAT or higher court.
This Assembly has already agreed to a process where the registrar can take initial action and place limitations on the builder’s licence or the construction occupation professional’s licence before a matter goes to the ACAT. So we have already agreed that it is necessary for the registrar to be able to take that type of interim action. Why should consumers not know that that action has been taken? Mr Coe says they should not know. We say they should know, because the Assembly has agreed it is necessary for the registrar to be able to take that action to protect consumers. If it is necessary to place interim limitations on a licence to protect consumers, why should consumers not know the moment that decision is taken rather than three or six months down the track
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video