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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (1 March) . . Page.. 448 ..

MR RUGENDYKE: I ask a supplementary question. ACTEW has invested considerable resources to TransAct, and this stands to be a highly beneficial network for the ACT. Under what terms is this being added to the proposal? By that I mean, would AGL be required to contribute funds over and above the negotiated joint venture deal or would these assets be part of the basic ACTEW package?

MR HUMPHRIES: Some of the details of those arrangements are still being negotiated between the two parties. As I said on an earlier occasion in answer to a question from Mr Osborne, I am prepared to put on the table the details of the way in which the proposed contract between ACTEW and AGL emerges as those negotiations continue. I think I heard Mr Berry on the radio this morning say that the Government has refused to put the information on the table. That is not true. We are quite prepared to put the information on the table.

Mr Berry: You haven't got it all yet.

MR HUMPHRIES: But it is not yet there to put on the table, and that is the point. So I cannot describe the terms. I think you said that we put a huge investment into TransAct and therefore it is an attractive investment to transfer to the partnership. That may not follow one from the other. Because there is a large amount invested in it, it does not follow that it is therefore a highly valuable asset. Sometimes you invest a lot in an asset which carries a high level of risk.

The TransAct project, in particular, has a large element of risk to it. It is presently being pursued from a number of angles by ACTEW. But because we put a lot of money into TransAct does not mean that ,if we put it out in the marketplace right now and try to sell it separately, we would get a princely sum. That does not follow at all. TransAct would be in this deal mainly to be able to diversify the activities of a joint venture and provide for a more attractive range of business opportunities for the synergies between ACTEW and AGL to develop. That is the main reason - - -

Mr Corbell: It means they can make more money.

MR HUMPHRIES: That is right. Mr Corbell has hit the nail on the head. It is to make more money - money which will be split evenly between ACTEW and AGL, and therefore between the ACT community and AGL. We would get more in that scenario. The ACT community would benefit from that, and I think that is a good proposal. As I said, I will certainly honour the commitment I made about providing to members of the Assembly the details of the contract as it emerges in this process.

MR HARGREAVES: My question is to the Attorney-General. Can the Attorney confirm that on 21 January last parking matters listed at the Magistrates Court were dropped due to an overcrowded court list? How often has such an incident occurred?

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