Tuesday, 3 March 2026

 David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (21:12): (2360) My matter is for the Minister for Planning, and it concerns the proposed abolition of the Architects Registration Board of Victoria. I am in receipt of a letter, as I think many are, from the Association of Consulting Architects and the state and national president Paul Viney. He lays out the membership of that organisation: 187 members – sole practitioners and large firms – and more than 2000 staff. The Silver review has recommended a super licensing body be put in place. The Architects Act of 1991 means that architects are fully funded by their own registration fees. The ARBV:

… is not a budgetary burden on government; rather, it is a profession-funded safeguard for the … public.

Further:

The regulatory framework must reflect the complexity of … responsibilities … education accreditation, registration standards, professional conduct …

The current registration board would not be assisted, he says – and I understand exactly the points he is making – by being absorbed into a large, omnibus registration body. For example, there is I understand a very significant risk that accreditation could be put at risk, and that would be deeply regrettable. He asks, respectfully, that:

… you support the retention of an independent, specialist architectural regulator and oppose any measures that would abolish the ARBV or dilute its statutory role, irrespective of the Government Department or Agency it is … responsible to.

I think he makes a good case. We saw this before the last election. The government was pushing forward with an agenda to deregister architects – to get rid of their registration – and this is a further step in that direction. There is no evidence that a better outcome will be achieved with an overarching superboard, and the minister, I think, needs to look carefully at this and ensure that our standards for architects are not diluted or weakened. It is an ancient profession, it is a respected profession, it is a profession where our built environment and the design that goes with that are very much to the fore, and it is a profession which I believe needs proper respect. I have to say it is a mistake to damage the profession’s standing and to weaken its oversight. In that context, I ask the planning minister to look closely at this and re-examine it.