Page 3577 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 18 September 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
zero-carbon cement—but there are a number of recycled products that should get more attention too. My amendment calls on the government to develop sustainability guidelines for the sustainable use of building materials in the ACT.
I note that Ms Cody, in her amendment, has moved a similar set of words and I very much support that part. That is why I voted yes in support when she moved that amendment. I see that as quite different to some of the rest of the motion.
I commend my amendment to the Assembly. I think the issue of guidelines for the sustainable use of building materials in the ACT is very important. It is actually a requirement under the Building Act 2004. The section has been there for many years and it has not yet been completed. I welcome the support of the chamber today for that work to be done. I believe Minister Ramsay will speak to that shortly and I look forward to his remarks on that because I think that there is a lot of opportunity in this space. I commend my amendment to the Assembly.
MR RAMSAY (Ginninderra—Attorney-General, Minister for the Arts, Creative Industries and Cultural Events, Minister for Building Quality Improvement, Minister for Business and Regulatory Services and Minister for Seniors and Veterans) (4.23): I rise to support the original motion and, as Minister for Building Quality Improvement, speak to the final point about the government’s development of guidelines for the sustainable use of building materials under the Building Act. As Mr Rattenbury said, he raised it recently with me and I have asked my directorate to look into it. However, with the broad range of the building quality reform agenda that is currently on foot, that will always be the highest priority that I have my officials focusing on.
While the amendments that have been proposed and moved by Minister Rattenbury are generally admirable—they call for the protection of native forests and they share with the original motion the recognition of the ACT government’s replanting of Ingledene Forest—we will not be supporting those amendments. We believe that the wording of the original motion adequately conveys the issue at hand and that there is no real justification for an amendment which rewords a number of technicalities that are not inconsistent with the spirit and the intention of the original motion. I am pleased to see the addition in the original motion of the final call about the development of sustainability guidelines under the Building Act; that is something that is shared with Minister Rattenbury’s amendments.
I am sure that we would all agree that Canberrans deserve a home of the highest quality to live in, first and foremost. Proper and safe use of sustainable building materials is also an admirable goal. If a dodgy builder or a corner-cutting developer has left you with cracking walls, water ingress or balconies that leak from above, the first concern is going to be better quality building. Rightly, that is where the government’s focus and energy are. We will be looking at the guidelines in due course. I thank the member for raising this in the context of timber products, which have an important role to play in sustainable building practices.
It is also important to note that our own existing Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act allows for more sustainable use of construction materials, including
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video