The Victorian government has announced plans to transfer the functions of the Architects Registration Board of Victoria (ARBV) to the renamed Business Licensing Authority. This raises concerns about the potential abolition of the ARBV and the threat to undermine decades of public protection and professional standards that most Victorians take for granted every time they enter a building.
We understand that the proposed absorption of the ARBV into the Business Licensing Authority is intended to improve efficiency and reduce costs. However, the ARBV is wholly self-funded and does not rely on taxpayer money, making this rationale fundamentally flawed.
When the Association of Consulting Architects met with government representatives in December, officials couldn’t confirm whether the ARBV would continue as a board within the Business Licensing Authority or be abolished entirely. This uncertainty about the future of architectural regulation in Victoria should concern everyone, not just architects
When the Association of Consulting Architects met with government representatives in December, officials couldn’t confirm whether the ARBV would continue as a board within the Business Licensing Authority or be abolished entirely. This uncertainty about the future of architectural regulation in Victoria should concern everyone, not just architects
Here’s what many people don’t understand about the Architects Act: it’s not about protecting architects, it’s about protecting the public.
The Act defines architects’ responsibilities to clients, communities, the environment, and the public interest. It establishes minimum standards for education, competence, and continuing professional development that ensure the people designing our buildings, schools, hospitals and homes know what they’re doing.
Abolishing the ARBV isn’t simply moving functions from one agency to another. It would likely require substantial amendments or a complete rewrite of the Architects Act. And history shows us what happens when such legislation is reopened: calls for repeal or dilution based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Act’s purpose inevitably follow.
Victorian practitioners would face uncertainty and reduced mobility, unable to work across state borders. Architectural education standards, already among the most rigorous professional qualifications in Australia, would be undermined. Victoria would fall out of step with other states and international practice and, most importantly, public confidence in the profession would erode.
Announcement on New Year’s Eve signals poor transparency
Adding to these concerns, the Victorian government released its regulatory impact statement for remaking the Architects Regulations on New Year’s Eve, with feedback due by 2 February.
The rushed process is troubling: announcements made immediately before Christmas, a regulatory impact statement released on December 31st, and a consultation period spanning the summer holiday break.
Even if preparatory work occurred earlier, this timeline doesn’t reflect the transparency and genuine consultation that such significant regulatory reform demands. Victorians deserve to understand what’s being proposed and why, and to have genuine input into decisions that affect the quality and safety of their built environment.
The ACA Victoria/Tasmania committee and I are actively engaging with the Victorian government, the opposition, and members of parliament to ensure that if the ARBV must be repositioned within a new licensing authority, it continues as a distinct regulatory body with genuine statutory independence, not just in name, but in practice.
This means preserving the ARBV’s specialised board structure, its authority over registration and disciplinary matters, and its ability to set and enforce professional standards without interference.
It means ensuring that architectural regulation remains guided by people who understand architecture’s unique responsibilities to public safety, environmental sustainability, and community wellbeing.
Every building we enter, every public space we use, every home we live in has been shaped by architectural regulation. Before we dismantle that protection in the name of administrative efficiency, we need to ask: what problem are we solving? And at what cost?
This affects every architect, and potentially everyone, in Victoria.