Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 353 ..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
That assessment process that Mr Quinlan compares the GSE proposal with will proceed with respect to a proposal for a joint venture with AGL if it is appropriate to do so. I would put it to the Assembly that it is appropriate to do so in the event the Assembly gives a clear green light to ACTEW and AGL to proceed with consideration of this commercial venture.
The Government has spent several million dollars in taxpayers' money producing, among other things, that report on the GSE proposal which Mr Quinlan held up, considering alternative proposals to the one which is before the Assembly today, namely, the sale of ACTEW outright, or most of ACTEW, and the proposed merger between ACTEW and AGL.
Mr Quinlan wants a more detailed assessment of the AGL proposal. He will get that, but it will have to occur once there is some kind of signal from this Assembly that the investment to be made by ACTEW and AGL will not be a wasted exercise. That is a reasonable request to make. It is the request the ACTEW board has made and it is the request the Government has made. It is not a particularly bizarre request, given that we have, in a sense, wasted already several million dollars, money which could be - - -
Mr Corbell: The onus is on you. The onus is on the Government.
MR HUMPHRIES: That may well be, Mr Corbell. But we are in a situation where we are developing proposals for the community and the Assembly to consider to secure ACTEW's place in a very uncertain future marketplace. We put proposals on the table from time to time to achieve that objective, and all we have from the Opposition of this place is: "No, we do not like that. Go away. Try something else". It is not surprising that we should be cautious before committing the ACTEW Corporation to further expenditure of public money on this venture before a signal has been sent that this proposal is, in principle, acceptable to the Assembly. I think that is a reasonable position to take, Mr Speaker. I dare say that if the Labor Party were in our shoes they would do precisely the same thing. Of course careful evaluations have to occur, but they will have to be on the basis that it is worth spending public money.
MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, on ABC radio yesterday morning you said the ACT Government entered into a hirer's agreement with the Canberra Raiders rugby league club to keep the team in Canberra. This agreement, of course, guarantees payments to the Raiders of up to $1.387m each year for the next five years. You said it was money well spent, given the economic and social impact of the club on the Canberra community. Chief Minister, on WIN TV last night Mr Kevin Neil, the chief executive officer of the Raiders, said that the Raiders had never considered leaving Canberra. Chief Minister, can you confirm that in the course of negotiations over the agreement the Raiders threatened to leave Canberra?
MS CARNELL: My understanding from discussions with Mr Neil was that his comment was they would not leave Canberra; they just would not have been in the competition.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .