Page 3246 - Week 12 - Thursday, 19 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
So far, Madam Speaker, our community, our urban designers and our governments have not taken up many of the marvellous opportunities that are available in alternative, cheap and environmentally less damaging energy to the extent that they can and should. Thank goodness we are making headway. The days have long gone when a person espousing concern for the environment would be labelled a fringe-dwelling hippy. Environmental concerns are becoming a necessity in government. I use as an example ACTION buses which are now experimenting with alternative fuels. In fact, I and many in this chamber will probably be attending the launch of "Diesohol - Future Fuel" next Tuesday, 1 December. ACT Electricity and Water are also running a strong education campaign for water and electricity saving.
It is true, Madam Speaker, that conducting this inquiry was an education for me, and I think for the other members of the committee. I strongly believe that education is our most important and urgent need in the area of energy efficiency. Without knowing what is possible, and what is becoming necessary, consumers cannot demand certain conditions which accommodate renewable energy, and providers cannot know how to provide the service.
As a government and law-makers, Madam Speaker, it is our responsibility to assist in the provision of that education. We have started with this inquiry and with other valuable initiatives in government, and I trust that we will keep going and continue to improve our options and our awareness. Mr Moore mentioned the Rio conference, and that, in itself, I think, epitomises the problems that we are looking at. Governments and communities can have views as to what we now require in terms of energy efficiency and environmental awareness. At the same time, business has its right, at the moment, to espouse its views on the viability of business. But at some point we must be forced to reach a stage of sustainability and to allow both to be accommodated. That, I think, is one of the most urgent parts of this debate.
Madam Speaker, as consumers it is our responsibility to accept the education process and to understand the facts concerning energy consumption and use. We must realise the consequences if we ignore that question. There are a variety of options available and we must have a go at developing them. It is all too easy to say, "Why should I? I am all right now"; but we are not all right and it is our responsibility. However, Madam Speaker, the processes we go through, the demands we put on ourselves and the targets we set must be realistic. Part of the problem can be targets which are too ambitious and therefore easily ignored, deferred or just forgotten. I believe that the report by the committee has done justice to this requirement for realism, and therefore I believe that it will have a very positive effect on our community.
Madam Speaker, the design and siting of houses is a perfect example of how easily we can achieve energy savings; yet how slow and unresponsive we are. Our community education is not yet sophisticated enough to ensure that such simple alternatives are the norm. I am aware that Mr Wood, over the past 12 months, has made mention of some of the less visionary environmental designs of houses in the new areas of Canberra, and I agree. For one, I find Gungahlin disappointing. We have a great opportunity to move ahead with some of the more progressive and energy efficient initiatives, but the response to date is not, shall we say, overwhelming.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .