Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 12 Hansard (Thursday, 28 October 2010) . . Page.. 5298 ..
Sustainable and toxic building materials—Information provided to Ms Le Couteur in May 2010.
In the interests of clarity and openness, I would like to reiterate the government’s position on this issue. ACTPLA is participating in a three-year national building material project that is largely funded by the commonwealth government to the tune of about $800,000. The project, which is managed by the Building Products Innovation Council and AusIndustry, will establish a toolkit of resources that will permit comprehensive lifecycle assessment of building and construction materials and products. A draft report was released for comment in February of this year. The project toolkit is targeted for final publication next month.
As I said when the issue was first raised, this is a complex matter that ultimately needs to be informed by the national work being done by the Australian Building Codes Board, the Building Products Innovation Council and AusIndustry rather than the ACT government undertaking this work in isolation. Developing a comprehensive ACT sustainable building material policy before the national project’s completion is likely to result in a duplication of that national project’s effort. In my view, it will be very expensive and ultimately counterproductive for the ACT to seek to go it alone here as we are part of a national process. That toolkit will be available, I understand, next month.
MR BARR: Yesterday in question time, I indicated that I would table for members the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education matters strategic plan 2010-13 outlining priorities and actions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education in ACT public schools. I present the following paper:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Matters—Strategic Plan 2010-2013.
MR CORBELL: Yesterday in question time, Ms Le Couteur asked me to explain why community members and shopkeepers in Ainslie say that they were excluded from consultation on the removal of a tree at the shops and did the consultation process meet the consultation benchmarks recently announced by the commissioner for the environment. I can advise Ms Le Couteur, through you, Mr Speaker, that, firstly, I cannot say why some members of the public say they were excluded from consultation in relation to the removal of this tree.
Public notification of the intention to remove the tree was undertaken according to the consultation benchmarks recently announced by the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment. This involved fixing a notification of tree removal notice to the tree and providing letters to adjacent lessees. The relevant time frames were provided for feedback.