Page 1072 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 5 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
compliance environment than any other operator. Under the guise of reducing red tape it has the potential to distort development and affect other opportunities external to the campus.
We are aware there are some concerns with UC. I note the previous Auditor-General’s report in terms of commercial activity. We have raised concerns about the development that has taken place there, and I am aware of a whole series of developments occurring at UC at the moment, Indeed there are some joint ventures that, as I understand it, are currently in part before the courts, so I will not discuss those in any great detail.
We have to avoid systems which are designed to create a level playing field being changed to become protectionist. We do not want a city where we have one rule for a certain set of players and other rules for the rest with enclaves developing; essentially a city within a city with different rules that favour the University of Canberra as compared to others. That is something that schedule 1 risks doing.
As a result, we on this side of the chamber believe the case has not been made that that aspect of this bill is not about red tape reduction; it is about providing a potentially competitive advantage to one organisation over others. That said, we will not be supporting schedule 1 in the detail stage. With regard to the other elements of the bill, we are supportive and, therefore, we will support the bill in principle.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (11.21): I welcome the opportunity to speak to this bill. The Greens support the removal of unnecessary regulatory burden for business, the community and government. The Red Tape Reduction Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 is part of a regular series of bills designed to address regulatory requirements that add unnecessary administrative and compliance costs. While each of the legislative requirements on their own may not be significant enough to justify stand-alone legislation, together they do add up.
The development of the bill has been supported by stakeholder engagement through a consultative body—the regulatory reform panel—as well as consultation individually with directorates, agencies and other relevant stakeholders in the ACT community.
As members will know, the bill seeks to amend a number of acts and regulations, including: the University of Canberra Act, the Financial Management Act, the Gaming Machine Act, Security Industry Act, the Liquor Act, the Charitable Collections Act, the Agents Act, the Public Unleased Land Act, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elected Body Act, and the Fair Trading (Motor Vehicle Repair Industry) Act. I would like to focus on specific points that amend various parts of that legislation.
With regard to the University of Canberra, the bill amends the University of Canberra Act to remove disincentives for third parties to form a company or joint venture with the University of Canberra. The amendments also lessen the university’s administrative burden due to overly prescriptive provisions in the memorandum or articles of association of UC‐controlled companies and in the submission of reports, returns and statements to the Treasurer.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video