Page 3382 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
appropriate Minister. The Minister and, I would imagine, the Cabinet of the day will have the final say in this regard. Whether the water level should be 350 or 370 kilolitres per household should not be debated on the floor of the Assembly.
If you want to apply that argument, Mr Moore, why do we not then debate the level of charges that ACTEW imposes for electricity and water? I forget that you are an expert in all matters and that you would expect that your input would be of far greater import than that of those who know what they are doing. I suggest, Mr Moore, that for once in your life you let people who know what they are doing get on and do it.
MRS NOLAN (4.38): Mr Speaker, I will be fairly brief in speaking in this debate this afternoon. I do believe that there is one particular issue, one particular area, that needs to be mentioned this afternoon in this debate. I refer in particular to the Water Rates (Amendment) Bill 1991. As a residential user of water, I believe that the reduction from 455 to 350 kilolitres is a sensible way to go. It certainly provides an incentive for all of us to conserve and save water wherever we can.
But, unfortunately, in this proposal there is one sector of our business community that has been severely disadvantaged, and that is the accommodation and tourism industry. There is no doubt that the accommodation industry, the hotels and motels, have no way of controlling the amount of water that is used in those properties.
Mr Moore: Yes, they can. They can put water savers on their showers.
MRS NOLAN: Fine. Mr Moore mentions water savers. All sorts of things can be done in relation to cistern flushing, et cetera; but we know that an individual guest in an individual room determines how much water he or she uses. I believe that the tourism industry in this city has been significantly disadvantaged in more recent times. Additional costs have been there continually. I think it would have been appropriate to give consideration to the accommodation industry.
I have had representations from many in the accommodation industry and I have written to the Chief Minister in relation to this issue. I know many in the accommodation industry who have done that already. I would like to urge that consideration be given to business impact when these sorts of decisions are taken. I sometimes think there is a very real need to have a residential rate, if you like, and a rate in relation to business. I would have thought that, in this particular case, that could have been considered.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .