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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 750 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

I believe it is true to say, that we have heard what can only be described as threats and blackmail from ACTEW and AGL if this Assembly does not approve the deal this day - not tomorrow or in another week or even in another month, but this day. The claim is that we will all be ruined; that AGL will walk away; that we will be left high and dry; that it is now or never. That is a threat. It is as simple as that. It is a threat we should not be prepared to countenance.

If that is the attitude now of a board and an aspiring private sector partner, when ACTEW is still under the full control of the Territory, how will they behave and how will they act when the reins are loosened? If this Assembly lets this deal proceed, how will the new 50 per cent privately owned company act and behave? How will it work ? The attitude to date does not encourage the cooperative and frank, open attitude that this community expects and that this community has received through ACTEW being in public ownership.

The Australia Institute, in its critique on the joint venture proposal, identified that the fifty-fifty ownership arrangements would result in the larger partner, AGL, having effective control over the company. The Australia Institute is the organisation which so critically and effectively demolished the last Government's claims about the need to privatise ACTEW in total. It is no wonder that Mr Humphries still smarts a little from that. Is this what the people of Canberra want? Do they want AGL to effectively control ACTEW? Is that consistent with the view taken by this Assembly following the enormous representations we received last year? No, it is not. If this Assembly agrees to this deal today, it is what is going to happen. Their wishes will be ignored.

This merger will result in the ACT sharing the risk associated with the soon to be deregulated gas retail industry in Australia. Yet the issue of risk is allegedly what we are meant to be addressing today in seeking support for this joint venture. It is ironic that this arrangement will almost certainly increase our risk rather than reduce it. At the same time, our ability to control the destiny of our own asset will have been fatally jeopardised. There is an irony in that which I cannot believe the majority of members in this place are prepared to accept.

The reality of this deal is that it will be extremely difficult for the government-appointed directors of the new company to resist the demands of the AGL parent company's board. If AGL's broader national plans and business strategy are thwarted through a deadlock on the joint venture board, it is almost certain that AGL will claim that this is putting the future of the joint venture company at risk. The threats will be there again. They will say, "We will walk out. We will walk away. You must comply with the overall strategy we are adopting at a national level".

The Government has claimed that it would walk away if this situation were to occur. As we heard in question time earlier this week and last week, the argument that will be put to the community by the Government is that we need to sell ACTEW to resolve such a problem. We cannot walk away from this deal, because it will cost us too much to get out of it.

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