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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (8 March) . . Page.. 687 ..

Mr Humphries (continuing):

At that point he got some assistance from the cavalry and sat down. Now, Mr Speaker, can the Treasurer tell the Assembly to what assets he referred, or is it the case that he really has very little appreciation of the enterprise he proposes to flog off?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, the sorts of assets which the retail arm of ACTEW would have would include - - -

Mr Stanhope: Paperclips?

MR HUMPHRIES: Well, at one level, of course, its most important asset is the people who work for ACTEW in that particular area. As I indicated yesterday in the - - -

Mr Stanhope: But they are not for sale.

MR HUMPHRIES: They are not for sale, says Mr Stanhope.

MR SPEAKER: Be quiet. Mr Hargreaves has asked a question. He deserves an answer, and he is getting one.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Stanhope says they are not for sale. Under your proposal they are for sale, of course. You are proposing to sell them. That is what you are saying we should be doing in this particular situation; that we should sell them.

Mr Hargreaves: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked a question through you to Mr Humphries. I would appreciate an answer through you to me, and not a conversation between the Minister and the rest of the Assembly.

MR SPEAKER: So would I, Mr Hargreaves. Please continue, Mr Humphries.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, apart from the people who work in that area, and that is about 47 or so staff, there are, most importantly, the contracts which ACTEW's energy arm has already obtained. I imagine that if someone wanted to buy the retail energy arm of ACTEW at the present time it is the contracts which would be the most important asset that they would be seeking to obtain.

Incidentally, Mr Speaker, it seems to me that if someone was to buy the retail arm only of ACTEW they would have to be somebody from outside the ACT obviously. It would not be a corporation in New South Wales because the New South Wales Government has indicated already that as far as its utilities are concerned it does not wish to deal with the ACT, to quote Mr Egan's words, "because of the vagaries of the ACT Assembly". So it would have to be a corporation based either in Victoria or Queensland, or possibly an overseas corporation of some sort.

Mr Speaker, it is most unlikely, on my advice, that any such corporation would be interested in taking up the customer contracts of ACTEW and taking up the work force which services those contracts at the present time, or whatever other assets there are such as the computer system, data bases, customer lists and things of that kind. Essentially they

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