1. DISCUSSION ON APPROACH John Howell, Senior Project Officer

2. ISSUES  Integration with OHS/WorkSafe  Adequacy of regulatory package consisting of HAR, Code, Guidance Notes and tools  Acceptability of the ”develop and wait” HAR revision approach  Other

3. Integration with OHS/WorkSafe  Builds upon a strong national system  Provides protection reference points & standards e.g. >10m2, with scope to go beyond. Imposition?  Caters for overlapping regulatory systems, resulting in harmonisation rather than confusion  Allows some interoperability between agencies  Greater leverage over demolishers & removalists  Learns from QLD approach  Need for an MOU

4. Adequacy of regulatory package consisting of HAR, Code, Guidance Notes and tools?  Covers range of relevant scenarios in detailed and tiered manner  Includes professionals, EHOs, regulators & public  Ability to respond to change  Presentation of mandatory elements  Importance of promotion, & also enforcement GN  Issue of resources & sustainability, both LG and EHD, especially training

5. Acceptability of the ”develop and wait” HAR revision approach  Avoids interim insufficient product  Avoids repetition, duplication, regulatory fatigue  Maintains momentum & exploits current EHD staff  Positions for rapid uptake  Maintenance of LG support & interest? Already engagement issues  Changing legal climate?

6. Others?