Page 1565 - Week 05 - Thursday, 15 May 2014

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


This change is not minor. We have been informed that industry bodies are not aware of and have not been consulted about this amendment. This is unacceptable. Major policy changes which will severely affect industry should only be implemented after proper consultation in a substantial bill. They should not be pushed through under the guise of minor amendments in the hope that people do not notice them. The Canberra Liberals will be opposing this clause in the bill.

It is also worth noting that the HIA and MBA were not even aware of this change at the time of the bill being brought on last week, probably because ACTPLA and the minister’s office did not consult with them and because this provision is tucked away in an omnibus bill. Again, this is terrible consultation by Mr Corbell and an abuse of the omnibus process.

Clauses 19 to 26 contain minor technical amendments to the Planning and Development Regulation. Clause 27 amends the list of developments in the merit track which are subject to minor public notification. This provision means minor additions or alterations to a residential unit within a multi-unit residential development and the erection of signage are now only subject to minor public notification. This involves letters to neighbours only and not a sign on the property or notification in the newspaper. Online notification will still be required. This reflects the fact that these minor alterations generally have a minimal impact except on some neighbours.

Clause 28 amends the Unit Titles Act to no longer require dual occupancy developments to be superimposed. The current requirements have proven unnecessary and the amendments should give more opportunities to smaller builders to provide dual occupancy developments on blocks where this is permitted under the territory plan. Clauses 19 to 21 amend the Utilities Act to extend the operation of sections related to the supply of electricity and gas until these provisions can be incorporated into the utilities technical regulation amendment bill.

In conclusion, the opposition will be supporting the bill except for clause 18. We are disappointed the government has sought to make this major policy change which will have serious consequences for the industry without proper consultation and hidden in a bill which is supposed to contain only minor and technical changes. For this reason, we will be opposing clause 18.

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) (11.31), in reply: I thank members for their overall support of this bill today. This is the sixth bill in the government’s omnibus planning, building and environment legislation amendment process. I think I can now say with some certainty that this is a well-regarded established process for minor policy and technical amendments of planning, building and environment legislation. It allows us to keep our legislation up to date and accurate in an efficient manner.

The bill presented proposes editorial, technical, consequential or minor policy amendments to the Building Act 2004, the Building (General) Regulation 2008, the


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video