Page 1666 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 3 June 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the home, such as the wall cavities and subfloors. This is reflected in the information that is provided to residents as part of their building file, and the clearance certificate that is associated with that building file, that states clearly that remnant loose-fill asbestos may remain on the property.
We know that our level of knowledge and understanding of these risks has continued to improve over time, and that is why the government has remained proactive in sending written advice to householders, reminding them of these issues, and that was most recently done earlier this year with correspondence from the Work Safety Commissioner to all of the homes known to the government to have been part of the program, advising them of the importance of being aware of these risks and ensuring that they have an up-to-date assessment to inform them as to the management of these risks.
The government continues to develop other policy responses. I expect the government will be making further announcements later this year in relation to further policy responses, to further assist and inform households about these risks and ways that they can be addressed. What we know, in terms of the advice from the public health officials, is that with appropriate management any public health risk is low and is manageable, and we continue to engage with our public health officials in relation to those matters. But it is very important that we understand that asbestos is pervasive in the urban environment because of its widespread use. It is a particular issue with the homes that have loose-fill amosite asbestos in them.
The final point I would make is that the government is now renewing and reconsidering how we will engage further with the commonwealth on this issue. This is a longstanding legacy problem bequeathed to the territory at self-government because of the failure on the part of the commonwealth prior to self-government to properly regulate and manage the risks that were known at that time in relation to the installation of loose-fill asbestos. We need now to get the commonwealth to shoulder their ongoing responsibilities associated with this historical liability and we are exploring new ways of pursuing that.
MADAM SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Smyth.
MR SMYTH: Minister, has the government or you met with the Fluffy Owners and Residents Action Group? If yes, when, and what was the outcome of this meeting? If no, why not? And have you met with the federal government—or when was the last meeting you had with the federal government on this issue?
MR CORBELL: Yes, I have met with the founder of the Fluffy Owners and Residents Action Group, Ms Heseltine. I met her right at the beginning of her decision when she advised me that she was establishing that group. At that time when I met with her, which was last month, I extended an invitation to her, once she had advised me that she was establishing the group, indicating my willingness to meet with that group. That invitation remains on the table and, as I understand it, a suitable time is currently being settled between the group and my office for me to meet not only with Ms Heseltine again but also with other members who have subsequently joined that group. So the government maintains a proactive approach in relation to these matters.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video