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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 11 Hansard (8 December) . . Page.. 3194 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

It is very important, I think, that members really think about why we are here. We are here to make decisions that are in the best interests of the ACT community. Mr Humphries is right; this is not an easy decision. The Government does not consider things such as selling assets in a willy-nilly manner. They are very serious decisions to take. However, we are elected to make hard decisions and avoiding those decisions is, in fact, a gross neglect of our duties. It is not appropriate for people to put their heads in the sand.

Today members are being asked to take a decision to ensure that the value of one of the Territory's most valuable assets, if not the most valuable asset, is secured and thereby put the ACT into a position where it can meet its future financial commitments. Or, Mr Speaker, we can simply ignore the problem, wish the problem away, and do absolutely nothing. I do not think that that is the right thing to do. This debate has been around for a number of months and I have not heard anyone opposite come up with any viable alternative to what is being proposed. I look forward to seeing whether anyone will do that in the course of this debate.

Mr Speaker, based on the advice of independent experts and the Government's consideration of the issues, I think it should be obvious to any fair-minded individual that the proposed sale and concession of ACTEW and the enhanced regulatory framework for utilities will result in an improved outcome for the whole ACT community. Our proposed approach is arguably the only way to ensure the provision of efficient and effective services whilst dealing with other pressing financial issues.

It is not that we are Robinson Crusoe in that regard, Mr Speaker. We are not alone. The Auditors-General of New South Wales, South Australia and, more recently, the ACT all recognise the imperatives that are driving governments across Australia to privatise their utilities. In addition, the need for changed ownership arrangements has been supported by the Electricity Supply Association, the Canberra Business Council, the ACT Region Chamber of Commerce, the Victorian Regulator-General, Access Economics, community and business groups, the ACTEW Corporation board and numerous citizens, as shown in letters to the editor published in the Canberra Times.

This Government's commitment during the election was to maintain and protect the value of the asset, an asset that independent analysis shows is worth more than $1 billion at present, and I stress "at present". One thing is certain: If the Government retains ownership, ACTEW will surely lose value. ACTEW itself says that it cannot compete effectively in the newly created competitive electricity market. Maybe it is a real shame that we have a newly created competitive electricity market. However, that is just a fact of life, Mr Speaker. We do. If ACTEW itself says that it cannot compete, it is important for us to do something about it. I think there is a real need for us to do something about it quickly. ACTEW cannot take the commercial risks it needs to take to operate in this market. Nor can the Government and the ACT community afford to inject the funds that would provide the capacity for ACTEW to diversify its operations interstate.

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