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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (2 July) . . Page.. 2251 ..

MR OSBORNE

The temperature difference is 8 degrees - which equals 1 % of the volume.

This would reduce the volume of a full tanker load from 40,000 litres to 39,600.

After travelling to Canberra this legislation would require the tanker and use the same calculation on delivery.

In other words, the volume would be adjusted to deliver 39,600 litres and not 40,000.

Mr Speaker, at a national level most States would not benefit greatly from legislation such as this.

The ACT, however, due to a continual temperature differential between Canberra and Sydney (especially in winter) would benefit all year around.

Similar legislation has been enacted in the American States of Hawaii in 1974 and California in 1976.

Canada has a similar system, but given the breadth of the continent has made its implementation voluntary.

The producers of petroleum products in Australia have continued to reject temperature conversion at both wholesale and retail level since it first became an issue in Australia 1991, however, their argument is based on a 1996 study of temperature trends during delivery on a national basis and is, therefore, irrelevant to conditions here in the ACT.

Mr Speaker, a secondary factor in support of this legislation is the environmental benefit.

For a number of years now it has been of great concern that our service stations have been losing 1-2 per cent of their fuel.

There is no way to determine whether or not the missing fuel is leaking underground without taking the effect of temperature change out of the equation.

Mr Speaker, this legislation has the full support of the ACT Service Stations Association, the ACT Branch of the Motor Trades Association and the National Standards Commission; and I commend it to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries ) adjourned.