← All decisions

1. What was proposedPeter CainLiberal · Opposition
   Read the original wording (330 words)

   That this Assembly: (1) notes that: (a) the ACT building and construction industry faces significant challenges, largely due to the regulatory burden imposed by the ACT Government; (b) building approval lead times have skyrocketed, with approvals now consuming 30 percent of some projects’ total budget; (c) the ACT planning system consistently frustrates and delays the building and construction industry, public servants, and the public, significantly driving up construction costs at all levels in the ACT; (d) the current workload for ACT building certifiers is unmanageable, leading to extensive project delays and cascading effects on project timelines and cost overruns; (e) there are delays in the approval process by the Tree Protection Unit, with a standard seven-week turnaround time for projects with minimal impact on tree cover being unsustainable; (f) the recent introduction of new pool fencing standards has caused widespread confusion among industry players as the standards are unclear, and there is insufficient guidance available to ensure compliance; and (g) there are currently approximately 600 development applications, or amendments to development applications, being considered or under assessment by the Territory Planning Authority and awaiting decisions; and (2) calls on the ACT Government to: (a) engage in extensive consultations with ACT building and construction business owners and workers to reduce regulatory burdens, streamline approval processes, and rebuild trust in the regulatory system; (b) introduce amendments to the regulatory framework for pool fencing to allow certification by licenced builders within this calendar year; (c) commit to maintaining the current National Construction Code in the ACT without further changes for the remainder of the 11 th Assembly; (d) table a ministerial statement on the feasibility of automatically approving building approvals and development applications that are not responded to within statutory timeframes by the end of the financial year; and (e) undertake an internal review of referral entities to address delays in providing decisions on building approvals and development applications and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year.

2. Change by the moverPeter CainLiberal · Opposition18 March 2025

   Grouped by key words as: added a new call or point.

   Before

   (c) commit to maintaining the current National Construction Code in the ACT without further changes for the remainder of the 11 th Assembly

   After this change

   (c) commit to making no amendments to the current National Construction Code in the ACT, which unnecessarily and unjustifiably increase costs or complexities to building and planning processes, to promote regulatory stability and confidence for the remainder of the 11th Assembly;

   The exact wording of this change

   Omit paragraph (2)(c), substitute: “(c) commit to making no amendments to the current National Construction Code in the ACT, which unnecessarily and unjustifiably increase costs or complexities to building and planning processes, to promote regulatory stability and confidence for the remainder of the 11th Assembly;”. Debate ensued. Mr Cain, who had already spoken, by leave, again addressed the Assembly.

   Not agreed in a recorded vote, 8 to 15.

   Ayes 8

   • Chiaka Barry, Peter Cain, Leanne Castley, Ed Cocks, Jeremy Hanson, James Milligan, Deborah Morris, Mark Parton

   Noes 15

   • Yvette Berry, Marisa Paterson, Michael Pettersson, Tara Cheyne, Chris Steel, Rachel Stephen-Smith, Caitlin Tough, Taimus Werner-Gibbings, Suzanne Orr
   • Andrew Braddock, Shane Rattenbury, Jo Clay, Laura Nuttall
   • Fiona Carrick, Thomas Emerson
3. Proposed changeJo ClayGreens · Crossbench18 March 2025

   Grouped by key words as: rewrote the proposal, changed a number or target, added reporting or consultation, turned an action into a review.

   The exact wording of this change

   Omit all text after “That this Assembly”, substitute: “(1) notes that: (a) the ACT building and construction industry faces significant challenges with the current development approvals process a significant roadblock to housing delivery; (b) building approval times have skyrocketed, with approvals now consuming 30 percent of some projects’ total budget; (c) the ACT planning system consistently frustrates and delays the building and construction industry, public servants, and the public, which impact on construction timeframes and costs at all levels in the ACT; (d) some members of industry have reported that the current workload for ACT Building Certifiers is unmanageable, leading to extensive project delays and cascading effects on project timelines and cost overruns; (e) the Urban Tree Act is being reviewed and there are delays in the approval process by the Tree Protection Unit, with some members of industry reporting a standard seven-week turnaround time for projects with minimal impact on tree cover or habitat trees; (f) the recent introduction of new pool fencing standards has caused widespread confusion among industry players as the standards are unclear, and there is insufficient guidance available to ensure compliance; and (g) there are approximately 600 development applications, or amendments to development applications, being considered or under assessment by the Territory Planning Authority and awaiting decisions; and (2) calls on the ACT Government to: (a) engage in extensive consultations with ACT building and construction business owners and workers to reduce regulatory burdens, streamline approval processes, and rebuild trust in the regulatory system; (b) table a ministerial statement on a review of the documentation of the new pool fencing standards to improve understanding of the new regulatory framework including the use of authorised persons and licensed building surveyors to issue compliance certificates for pool fencing and ensuring there are enough certifiers to do the work, and the system is operating smoothly, by the end of the calendar year; (c) undertake an internal review of the assessment of development applications, exempt declarations and staffing requirements in the development application processing team to identify additional streamlined changes to meet its performance targets on the processing of development applications and exempt declarations and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year; and (d) undertake an internal review of referral entities to address delays in providing decisions on building approvals and development applications and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year.”. Debate continued.

   Agreed in a recorded vote, 15 to 8. Its wording is in the final text.

   Ayes 15

   • Yvette Berry, Marisa Paterson, Michael Pettersson, Tara Cheyne, Chris Steel, Rachel Stephen-Smith, Caitlin Tough, Taimus Werner-Gibbings, Suzanne Orr
   • Andrew Braddock, Shane Rattenbury, Jo Clay, Laura Nuttall
   • Fiona Carrick, Thomas Emerson

   Noes 8

   • Chiaka Barry, Peter Cain, Leanne Castley, Ed Cocks, Jeremy Hanson, James Milligan, Deborah Morris, Mark Parton
4. Change to Jo Clay's changeFiona CarrickIndependent · Crossbench18 March 2025

   Grouped by key words as: added a new call or point.

   The exact wording of this change

   to Ms Clay’s proposed amendment: Omit paragraph (2)(a), substitute: “(a) engage in extensive consultations with ACT building and construction business owners, workers and the community to reduce regulatory burden, streamline approval processes, and rebuild trust in the regulatory system;”. Debate continued.

   Agreed on the voices. No individual votes were recorded. Its wording is in the final text.

5. What the Assembly decidedAgreed

   Decided on the voices: no individual votes were recorded, so this doesn’t show that every MLA agreed.

   Final agreed wording, with changes marked

   That this Assembly: (1) notes that: (a) the ACT building and construction industry faces significant challenges with the current development approvals process a significant roadblock to housing delivery; (b) building approval times have skyrocketed, with approvals now consuming 30 percent of some projects’ total budget; (c) the ACT planning system consistently frustrates and delays the building and construction industry, public servants, and the public, which impact on construction timeframes and costs at all levels in the ACT; (d) some members of industry have reported that the current workload for ACT Building Certifiers is unmanageable, leading to extensive project delays and cascading effects on project timelines and cost overruns; (e) the Urban Tree Act is being reviewed and there are delays in the approval process by the Tree Protection Unit, with some members of industry reporting a standard seven-week turnaround time for projects with minimal impact on tree cover or habitat trees; (f) the recent introduction of new pool fencing standards has caused widespread confusion among industry players as the standards are unclear, and there is insufficient guidance available to ensure compliance; and (g) there are approximately 600 development applications, or amendments to development applications, being considered or under assessment by the Territory Planning Authority and awaiting decisions; and (2) calls on the ACT Government to: (a) engage in extensive consultations with ACT building and construction business owners, workers and the community to reduce regulatory burden, streamline approval processes, and rebuild trust in the regulatory systemCarrick; (b) table a ministerial statement on a review of the documentation of the new pool fencing standards to improve understanding of the new regulatory framework including the use of authorised persons and licensed building surveyors to issue compliance certificates for pool fencing and ensuring there are enough certifiers to do the work, and the system is operating smoothly, by the end of the calendar year; (c) undertake an internal review of the assessment of development applications, exempt declarations and staffing requirements in the development application processing team to identify additional streamlined changes to meet its performance targets on the processing of development applications and exempt declarations and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year; and (d) undertake an internal review of referral entities to address delays in providing decisions on building approvals and development applications and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year.

   Original and final wording compared

   taken out put in

   That this Assembly: (1) notes that: (a) the ACT building and construction industry faces significant challenges [taken out: largely due to the regulatory burden imposed by][put in: with]the [taken out: ACT Government;][put in: current development approvals process a significant roadblock to housing delivery;](b) building approval [taken out: lead]times have skyrocketed, with approvals now consuming 30 percent of some projects’ total budget; (c) the ACT planning system consistently frustrates and delays the building and construction industry, public servants, and the public, [taken out: significantly driving up][put in: which impact on]construction [put in: timeframes and]costs at all levels in the ACT; (d) [put in: some members of industry have reported that]the current workload for ACT Building Certifiers is unmanageable, leading to extensive project delays and cascading effects on project timelines and cost overruns; (e) [put in: the Urban Tree Act is being reviewed and]there are delays in the approval process by the Tree Protection Unit, with [put in: some members of industry reporting]a standard seven-week turnaround time for projects with minimal impact on tree cover [taken out: being unsustainable;][put in: or habitat trees;](f) the recent introduction of new pool fencing standards has caused widespread confusion among industry players as the standards are unclear, and there is insufficient guidance available to ensure compliance; and (g) there are [taken out: currently]approximately 600 development applications, or amendments to development applications, being considered or under assessment by the Territory Planning Authority and awaiting decisions; and (2) calls on the ACT Government to: (a) engage in extensive consultations with ACT building and construction business owners, [taken out: and]workers [put in: and the community]to reduce regulatory [taken out: burdens,][put in: burden,]streamline approval processes, and rebuild trust in the regulatory system; (b) [taken out: introduce amendments][put in: table a ministerial statement on a review of the documentation of the new pool fencing standards]to [put in: improve understanding of]the [put in: new]regulatory framework [put in: including the use of authorised persons and licensed building surveyors to issue compliance certificates]for pool fencing [put in: and ensuring there are enough certifiers]to [taken out: allow certification][put in: do the work, and the system is operating smoothly,]by [taken out: licenced builders within this][put in: the end of the]calendar year; (c) [taken out: commit to maintaining][put in: undertake an internal review of]the [taken out: current National Construction Code][put in: assessment of development applications, exempt declarations and staffing requirements]in the [taken out: ACT without further][put in: development application processing team to identify additional streamlined]changes [taken out: for the remainder of the 11 th Assembly; (d) table a ministerial statement][put in: to meet its performance targets]on the [taken out: feasibility][put in: processing]of [taken out: automatically approving building approvals and]development applications [taken out: that are not responded][put in: and exempt declarations and report back]to [taken out: within statutory timeframes][put in: the Assembly]by the end of the [taken out: financial][put in: calendar]year; and [taken out: (e)][put in: (d)]undertake an internal review of referral entities to address delays in providing decisions on building approvals and development applications and report back to the Assembly by the end of the calendar year.

   Compared word by word by computer, ignoring punctuation. It shows what differs, not which change made each difference; the steps above show that.