Duynhoven Harry: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
Duynhoven Harry: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6673] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Energy) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chairman. I think it is a pity that Katherine Rich the chairperson of the Commerce Committee is not here this evening because— 
Simon Power 
: Point of order— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I know what the member is going to say. The Minister knows he cannot refer to the absence of a member. All of us at some time or another have urgent public business to attend to. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Thank you Mr Chairman. You are quite right. Can I say that it is a pity that Katherine Rich has not taken a call this evening because she would have added considerably to the debate and maybe even have been able to help some of her colleagues who seem to have had a little amnesia in regard to the processes here. I say to Brian Connell that I greatly appreciated his comments. One learns something new every day. I did not know for example Brian—even though I have known you for a fair while— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Use the member’s full name please. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: I did not know that the member was in the business of making hot-water cylinders many of which I have probably installed without realising they came from his company. 
The issue of the relationship between the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board and the Industry Training Organisation was one of the really difficult ones that had to be considered during the process of this bill. The registration and competence issue that the member referred to is a really important one. First is the basic qualification which is necessary. Secondly it is necessary to ensure ongoing competence and I think the member who has just spoken was the first speaker in this debate from his side of the Chamber who actually recognised that a very important feature of this bill is to ensure ongoing competence. 
To Pansy Wong I say that yes the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill was split out from the original Energy Safety Review Bill but the bills were kept as companion bills. If one looks at the two bills together one will see that Parts 1 to 4 remain with the original bill and that Part 5 onwards becomes the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. It does indicate that they will be reassembled some time. We also had the view—and on one occasion I sat in the Commerce Committee and took part in a round-table discussion which I thought was a very valuable thing to do—over the issues about how we managed the dysfunctional relationships that were in the plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying industry. Whereas the electrical part of the bill was ready to proceed—the electrical industry and the gas industry were keen to have the bill progressed—we still had work to do with the plumbing and drainlaying side of the industry. 
 I am pleased that the select committee took that approach. I am pleased that the issues that were so obvious then have now been largely resolved and we have moved on and that the review that Hazel Armstrong conducted on behalf I think of the Minister for Tertiary Education showed that the issues being spoken about by many members—the low pass rates and the difficulty of getting qualified people out into the industry—were actually being addressed. I think that the review has given us a way forward. It has allowed the industry to regroup to refocus on its core task of training apprentices and ensuring that those tradespeople are properly qualified. That means not only that they are registered to be tradespeople but that their practising licence if you like—their currency—is established and that will see the industry in much better stead. 
I think we now have the bills in pretty good shape. The select committee has done a good job. It has done the job that select committees are there to do—to listen to the public and to get feedback from them. I thoroughly agreed with the concept of keeping registration. I actually strongly argued that we must keep registration as well as a practising licence regime. I think it would be unfair if I were not in Parliament for me to be expected to resume work in the electrical trade after 18 20-odd years away without having any refresher course for example. That would be just crazy stuff. So that is why we have the concept of an original registration plus a currency—a licence to practise. I think that that is a very good model on which to build and the electricity gas and plumbing and drainlaying industry all now have that concept embedded in this legislation. I think we have done a good job. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to Part 5 be agreed to. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Part 5 as amended agreed to.