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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (7 March) . . Page.. 597 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

establishment of a system of power generation in the ACT which is significantly less damaging to the environment, which produces significantly less in greenhouse emissions than ordinary black coal and, in particular, fewer emissions than brown coal, is going to contribute to the reduction of the ACT's greenhouse gas problem.

I have not seen the basis of Dr Hamilton's claims with respect to the greenhouse gas effect of a gas-fired power station. I note that the report of the Australia Institute apparently was available yesterday but was not provided to the Government until today, and even then it was via a journalist rather than via the Australia Institute itself and I would have to take the recommendations of that report with a very large grain of salt. My view is that clearly there is a significant advantage to be obtained by establishing such a facility in the ACT.

MR QUINLAN: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. In response to written questioning, the chief executive of ACTEW stated, I think, that some 25 or 30 per cent of the output of the proposed power station would be used in the ACT. Treasurer, to your knowledge, has any deal at all been done in relation to that power station? If so, is that indicative that more of the merger deal has been stitched up than we have been advised at this point? Is the Assembly being treated as a rubber stamp in this exercise?

MR SPEAKER: We have had a three-part supplementary question, which I am not prepared to allow. I have told you about these things before.

Mr Berry: Do you want to stop questioning on ACTEW?

MR SPEAKER: No, I do not, but you must tailor your questions so that they fit in with standing orders.

Mr Quinlan: It was the same question just emphasised, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: In which case it is repetition and does not have to be answered at all.

MR HUMPHRIES: I will try to encapsulate the thrust of the question. Mr Quinlan quoted a figure for the amount of power that would be taken for ACT use from the gas-fired power station. Let me say that the figure I have seen from ACTEW is a minimum figure of a third, approximately, of the output of the station. It could conceivably be higher, as I understand it, than the third which has been referred to and which Mr Quinlan just quoted. Secondly, has any deal been done about the use of the station's output? No, as far as I am aware it has not been done. I am certainly aware that people are discussing the proposal and that there will be the issue of addressing what kind of role the gas-fired power station would play within the ACT's energy needs if this proposal were to get off the ground. As to whether any deal has been done, not to my knowledge, Mr Speaker. Is the Assembly being treated like a rubber stamp? No, Mr Speaker. After the experience of recent months, we would not be treating the Assembly with anything other than the most tender of kid gloves and we are doing it on this occasion as well.

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