How to watch the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into Annual and Financial Reports 2025 2026 (9 November 2026) 12 hr ago

Economics Committee: opening, export education, innovation, investment and international engagement

Fiona Carrick and 2 others

The Economics Committee opens with analysis of international education caps, innovation precincts, CBRIN disruptions, ACT’s public-sector reliance and UC financial risks, including preconditions for any UC–CIT merger, then probes the broader private investment climate, large-scale battery projects, business dynamics, and the strategy and returns of trade missions and international engagement.

In this chapter

1. Economics Committee: opening, international education, innovation precincts and UC–CIT mergerFiona Carrick
2. Private investment climate, large-scale batteries, business dynamics and international engagementFiona Carrick

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into Annual and Financial Reports 2025 2026 (9 November 2026) 14 hr ago

Public Accounts Committee: insurance liabilities, concessions, budget controls and tax debt management

Fiona Carrick and 5 others

Members examine ACT Insurance Authority’s exposure to public liability, abuse and climate risks, then question the minister on household concessions, payroll tax and GST relativities, before turning to revenue forecasting and budget control frameworks and concluding with detailed discussion of COVID-era tax debts, arrears and hardship settings in the Revenue Office.

In this chapter

1. ACT Insurance Authority: liabilities, premiums and capital riskFiona Carrick
2. Household concessions, Commonwealth payroll tax and GST equalisationRachel Stephen-Smith
3. Procurement scope clarification, Secure Local Jobs framework and major labour hire contractEd Cocks

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into Annual and Financial Reports 2025 2026 (9 November 2026) 14 hr ago

Public Accounts Committee: procurement transparency, local content and First Nations contracting

Ed Cocks and 1 other

The committee opens and scrutinises procurement governance, including notifiable contracts obligations, the Secure Local Jobs framework, major labour hire arrangements, and data limitations in tracking local, SME and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander supplier participation, before closing with clarification of the Code’s labour standards focus and processes for questions on notice.

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 1:02 pm)

ACTCOSS: call for community sector exemption from the Code

ACTCOSS argues that non‑profit community organisations already face extensive oversight and financial transparency, so the Secure Local Jobs Code adds unfunded administrative cost without demonstrated benefit, and proposes sector‑wide exemption (potentially tied to ACNC registration), improved indexation and commissioning settings, better Advisory Council representation, publication of the 2021 review, and alternatives such as self‑certification and reliance on existing regulators and whistleblower protections.

In this chapter

1. Opening of ACTCOSS evidence: scope and benefits of Code
2. Regulatory duplication and call for full exemption
3. Government funding certainty and incentives for secure jobs

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 1:02 pm)

YWCA Canberra: community services, funding settings and Code relevance

YWCA Canberra outlines why the Secure Local Jobs Code is poorly suited to the community sector given existing regulation and tight, short-term funding, arguing that fixed‑price contracts and insufficient weighting for local non‑profit providers undermine secure local employment more than Code settings and that regulation should focus on service quality, safeguarding and award compliance instead of duplicative certification.

In this chapter

1. Chair: opening, privilege and hearing procedure
2. Community sector suitability of Secure Local Jobs Code
3. Advisory Council composition and lack of community expertise

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 1:02 pm)

Property Council witness: Code duplication, compliance and procurement

Evidence from the Property Council of Australia on how the Secure Local Jobs Code overlaps with federal workplace laws, increases compliance and reporting burdens (especially for small business), and how alternative procurement-based compliance checks, complaints pathways and local jobs mechanisms could replace the current Code regime.

In this chapter

1. Chair: witness introduction and focus on Code clauses 13–15
2. Small business obligations and union access under the Code
3. Compliance costs and duplicated reporting across ACT procurement

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

Minister and Registrar on Code operation, scope, review and evidence base

James Milligan and 4 others

The Minister and officials address termination of the UnionsACT MOU, the interaction between the Code, local industry participation policy and funding practices, and whether to subsidise compliance costs for community organisations. They outline the independent review’s focus (thresholds, multi‑year contracts, audit costs and burden on small entities), explain registrar powers, investigations, ongoing monitoring and team resourcing, discuss sector coverage criteria, indexation settings and local content data, and set out the central added value of certification and centralised oversight compared to existing regulators, including sanctions data, before closing the hearing.

In this chapter

1. Chair: opening and MOU terminationJames Milligan
2. Local contractors and interaction with LIPPRachel Stephen-Smith
3. Funding code compliance for community organisationsJames Milligan

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

Master Builders ACT evidence on duplication, local industry and alternative safeguards

James Milligan and 3 others

Master Builders representatives support repealing the Code, asserting that existing regulators (WorkSafe, Fair Work, OFSC) and contract management adequately protect workers, while the Code adds cost, delays and confusion without proven outcome benefits. The committee interrogates duplication of tender requirements, the registrar’s value, non‑compliance cases, local procurement outcomes and weighting for ACT businesses, federal versus ACT remedies, transparency and audit options, use of transient interstate workforces, industry self‑regulation, and whether any retained framework should focus on ongoing checks instead of upfront ‘tick‑box’ certification.

In this chapter

1. Chair introduces Master Builders ACT witnessesJames Milligan
2. Master Builders: case for repealing the Code and reliance on existing regulatorsJames Milligan
3. Chair: ACT vs NSW construction competitivenessJames Milligan

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

Canberra Business Chamber critique of the Code and preference for contract‑based enforcement

James Milligan and 3 others

The Chamber argues for repealing the Secure Local Jobs Code as duplicative of existing workplace and WHS laws, citing administrative duplication, higher procurement costs, market entry barriers and limited effectiveness against determined bad actors. Questioning covers whether any unique elements should be retained, the Code’s impact on competition and local participation, centralisation of compliance skills, evidence for ACT cost claims, options for local preference and simplified pathways, and debates over whether worker protections and wage‑theft enforcement should rely solely on Commonwealth law and contract conditions rather than an ACT‑specific certification regime.

In this chapter

1. Canberra Business Chamber: case for repealing the CodeJames Milligan
2. Administrative duplication and proving legal compliance up frontJames Milligan
3. Overlap with other laws and limits of the Code against bad actorsJames Milligan

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

CFMEU construction evidence on sham contracting, registrar powers and procurement model

James Milligan and 3 others

The CFMEU explains how the Code addresses sham contracting and safety through procurement leverage, arguing it provides more accessible, system‑wide incentives than Fair Work alone and supporting a two‑gate model that screens out poor safety performers. The union rejects small‑business exemptions while supporting simpler pathways, calls for clearer registrar role, stronger use of existing powers, greater transparency and ongoing compliance reporting, and defends stronger Code enforcement and WHS record use against concerns about red tape before the session closes.

In this chapter

1. Opening of CFMEU session and scope of evidenceJames Milligan
2. Sham contracting: Secure Local Jobs Code versus Fair Work Act
3. Accessibility of rights and behavioural incentives under the CodeJo Clay

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

United Workers Union evidence on exploitation, vetting and small‑business pathways

James Milligan and 3 others

UWU witnesses describe pre‑Code exploitation in cleaning and security, argue the Code’s certification and vetting functions deter ‘dodgy’ operators and complement but do not duplicate Fair Work remedies, and stress the importance of linking ACT contracts to labour standards. Members test whether the Code hinders tenders, explore confusion over ‘local’ versus ‘secure’ jobs, question lighter pathways for small firms, and probe ongoing compliance, worker protections, registrar powers and the added value of the Code versus federal law before the session concludes.

In this chapter

1. UWU witnesses: opening, privilege and tendering impactsJames Milligan
2. Carrick–UWU and workers: exploitation, objectives and contract dynamicsFiona Carrick
3. Clay–UWU: Fair Work changes versus ACT CodeJo Clay

Watch the moment Share

Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration: Standing Committee on Public Accounts and Administration - Inquiry into the secure local jobs Code (2 November 2026, 8:31 am)

ASU evidence on community sector funding and Code impacts

James Milligan and 3 others

The ASU outlines how the Secure Local Jobs Code operates in ACT community services, highlighting its role as an additional lever for consultation, dispute resolution and psychosocial safety while stressing that job security is primarily driven by adequate, longer-term funding. Discussion covers short funding cycles, administrative burden, indexation settings, sector coverage, wage theft risks, registrar powers and the need for clearer objectives and worker education before the ASU session closes.

In this chapter

1. Chair: opening, procedure and first questionJames Milligan
2. Chair–ASU: evidence of improved job securityJames Milligan
3. Carrick–ASU: funding cycles, admin burden and accountabilityFiona Carrick

Watch the moment Share