Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2006 Week 09 Hansard (Thursday, 21 September 2006) . . Page.. 3014 ..
private and public construction sites is carried out to appropriate standards of safety and professionalism, and training is fundamental to ensuring this.
As members can see, the amendments are quite simple and straightforward but will make a significant improvement to the act. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Debate (on motion by Mrs Dunne) adjourned to the next sitting.
Public Accounts—Standing Committee
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (11.04): I present the following report:
Public Accounts—Standing Committee—Report 7—Review of Auditor-General’s Report No 2 of 2005: Development Application and Approval Process, dated 18 September 2006, together with a copy of the extracts of the relevant minutes of proceedings.
I seek leave to move a motion authorising the report for publication.
MR MULCAHY: I move:
That the report be authorised for publication.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
MR MULCAHY: I move:
That the report be noted.
Auditor-General’s report No 2 of 2005 was presented to the Legislative Assembly on 5 May 2005 and consequently referred to the committee for inquiry. The audit report presents the results of a performance audit that reviewed the development assessment process of the Australian Capital Territory.
The committee received a briefing from the Auditor-General on the audit report and sought and received a government submission in relation to the audit report’s recommendations. The committee sought views from a range of people and organisations, including the business community, community councils and residents’ associations, building industry organisations, organisations and associations interested in ecologically sustainable development, and the ACT community. The committee’s report examines a selection of the significant issues, including the key findings and recommendations raised by the Auditor-General in relation to the development assessment process.
Mr Speaker, there are now widespread perceptions across all jurisdictions that development assessment systems are too complex and costly and not particularly effective, certainly not as effective as would be desirable. According to the Centre for