Page 1298 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 5 May 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(Licensing) Act 2004 and the Construction Occupations (Licensing) Regulation 2004; the Environment Protection Act 1997; the Planning and Development Regulation 2008; the Utilities Act 2000; and the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011. The principal amendments made by this bill will strengthen building and construction laws and ensure practical and efficient asbestos safety management in the territory. Other more minor and consequential amendments made by the bill have been discussed by Ms Fitzharris.
As members of the Assembly are well aware, asbestos is the most insidious legacy of our past building practices. As a government we must be proactive in our approach to the health and wellbeing of our entire community, particularly those who work within it. The government remains committed to continuing to have nation-leading asbestos management frameworks and practices. At this point I will give a bit of history around the amendments made by the bill in relation to asbestos management.
In 2014 the territory’s asbestos management framework was harmonised with those of other model jurisdictions, in accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement for Regulatory and Operational Reform in Occupational Health and Safety. Asbestos licensing provisions were removed from the Construction Occupations (Licensing) Act 2004 by the Dangerous Substances (Asbestos Safety Reform) Legislation Amendment Act 2014, effective January 2015. This means asbestos assessor and removalist licensing is now regulated in the territory by the Work Health and Safety Act and the Dangerous Substances Act 2004. This means asbestos can only be removed by a licensed asbestos removalist. The Construction Occupations (Licensing) Act does not apply in this situation.
This approach was working well in relation to asbestos found in discrete forms—for example, a piece of asbestos cement sheeting. Specialist building knowledge is not required to remove asbestos in this circumstance. However, recent investigations in relation to Mr Fluffy houses have revealed that asbestos can be in the infrastructure of a building. In this case, removal of the asbestos also requires the removal of infrastructure that could be critical to the structural integrity of the building. The discovery meant there was a regulatory gap with safety implications not just for the public but also for workers. The problem was that an asbestos removalist’s licence does not require a licensee to have the specialist knowledge required to safely remove critical infrastructure of a building. A builder’s licence requires this specialist knowledge, but under the construction occupation licensing laws a bui1der’s licence did not allow the handling of asbestos.
I will give an example: a Mr Fluffy house is to be demolished. A builder cannot do the work or supervise doing the work because the builder’s licence does not permit the builder to handle asbestos; only an asbestos removalist can do the asbestos removal. But the removalist does not have the specialist knowledge, nor does his licence qualify him, to safely demolish a building. Clause 34 of the bill closes this regulatory gap by removing the restriction imposed by section 8 of the Construction Occupations (Licensing) Act on builders dealing with asbestos. The bill ensures that building work that warrants a licensed builder’s expertise or supervision and involves asbestos removal is within the scope of licensable work of a builder.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video