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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 760 ..

MS CARNELL: What we have not done is just sit on our hands and knock and be negative like those opposite. That really shows in the ACTEW/AGL debate that is on at the moment. What those opposite want to do - - -

Mr Corbell: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Of what relevance to the supplementary question is any mention of the ACTEW/AGL debate? Or is the Chief Minister simply trying to score political points during question time, something, Mr Speaker, that you indicated you would not allow?

MR SPEAKER: I am watching the time and I will remind you when four minutes comes up, I can assure you.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, this has everything to do with jobs and the debate today has everything to do with jobs.

Mr Corbell: It is a disgraceful ruling, Mr Speaker.

Mr Moore: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I refer to standing order 202(e). Mr Corbell interjected "That was a disgraceful ruling", and that is wilfully disregarding the authority of the chair. He should be named.

MR SPEAKER: If you said that, Mr Corbell, withdraw it, please.

Mr Corbell: That is pathetic, Mr Moore. Mr Speaker, I hope that in the future you will continue to rule in an even-handed manner on these issues, but if any offence has been taken I withdraw my comment.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, if those opposite do not believe that the ACTEW/AGL debate today is about jobs, then let me remind them very quickly that they are suggesting selling the retail arm. That will be 50 fewer jobs. We are suggesting an approach that will create 100 new jobs. That is 150 jobs difference. Already ACTEW has shed 200 jobs. Do we want to see more of that? Well, this side of the house does not. We want to see more jobs, not fewer, as those opposite seem to want.

MR QUINLAN: My question is to the Treasurer. We have heard today, via the media, that AGL have stated that they will walk away from the proposed merger deal if the proposal is not given a green light today. In responding to this question you might relay your understanding of that. I would not like to think that AGL was misrepresented purely because of one media report. If it is the case, will the Treasurer bow to bullying tactics, particularly in light of today's article in the Financial Review which indicates that there are other bodies seeking strength in energy retail, and that the electricity supply industry is disaggregating, and separating retail energy from electricity

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