Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (6 November) . . Page.. 3751 ..

[COGNATE BILL:

Debate resumed.

MR WHITECROSS (4.25): The Labor Party will be supporting this legislation, which provides a framework for the introduction of retail competition into the ACT in the electricity market. The introduction of competition at the retail level in the electricity market is something which has been the subject of national competition agreements. An agreement signed by the current Chief Minister, Kate Carnell, back in April 1995 provides for completion of the transition to a fully competitive national electricity market by 1 July 1999, which is about 20 months away. The emphasis there is on transition. The Government is seeking, as part of that transition, to pass this legislation now to allow for the ACT to participate in retail competition in relation to at least some of the customers by the first half of 1998.

The first thing that should be said about this legislation is that, notwithstanding, as the Minister will no doubt say in his reply, that we knew about the competition agreement and that we have seen in the past timetables for moving towards a competitive market, the Government have introduced this legislation very much at the last minute. In fact, they have introduced it so late that problems have already arisen as to how they intend to get the legislation into a form for passage which will allow them to meet their own timetable. Members of the Opposition and the crossbenches have been begged and pleaded with to be careful in the amendments we move, so that we do not disturb the Government's timetable. I think we will find when we get to the detail stage that the Opposition and members of the crossbenches have been terribly accommodating of the Government's meeting their own timetable. But it has to be said that it should not fall to the Opposition and it should not fall to the crossbenches to have to bend over backwards to allow the Government to meet their own timetables because the Minister is too incompetent to get his legislation before the parliament in a timely way to allow for proper deliberation on the legislation and proper consideration of any amendments.

That deliberation does not go to the question of whether we support the introduction of retail competition; it goes to the detail of the Bill. The point about debating legislation is not just the principle of whether we support the introduction of retail competition as agreed to in national competition agreements, but whether the implementation as encompassed in the Bills is appropriate. This Minister and this Government have again and again shown their contempt for the Assembly by repeatedly leaving legislation to the last minute and then running out sob stories to the crossbenches and to the Opposition about how legislation really has to be passed now, even though we have only just got it, otherwise we would stuff up their timetables. That is simply not an acceptable course. I think the Government ought to reconsider their approach, because I think the time will come when they will find themselves inconvenienced by the Assembly because of their propensity to leave things until it is too late.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .