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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 840 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

operation. They have not convinced me in any way that they are looking at this through the eyes of ecologically sustainable development. We had this discussion yesterday. I have not seen any analysis from this Government that gives me confidence that the decision-making processes here have effectively integrated both long- and short-term economic and environmental, social and equity considerations. I have no guarantee of that.

I am told to have faith. I listened to Mr Humphries yesterday answering Mr Kaine's questions on CSOs. It sounded like anything was up for grabs. Mr Humphries said, "That is an interesting idea. CSOs could channel through the organisations and maybe we could link them with the Utilities Bill. Yes, that is an interesting idea". We are at the preliminary stage, apparently, of working out how we are going to guarantee equity considerations, but we still vote. Clearly, the first-core objective of ESD has not been applied in the analysis of this proposal before it has been put to us to vote on.

Another key principle would be that the global dimension of environmental impacts of actions and policies should be recognised and considered. I do not see that. We have had certain claims about greenhouse gas emissions and gas-fired power stations. We have no understanding of the commitment of this new, merged company to green power. Do we know exactly what AGL has done in Victoria with green power? Do we know what AGL is doing in South Australia? AGL merged with the retail sector of ETSA in South Australia? What has happened to the renewable energy section of ETSA since they merged with AGL? What has happened in Victoria? What work has been done with AGL on green power?

This Government has claimed that it wants to purchase 100 per cent green power in the city for its own use by 2008. That is a laudable and commendable goal. How are we going to know whether we are going to have that much green power to purchase? I have asked that question here, and Mr Smyth says that the market would take care of it but that they are looking at some initiatives. (Further extension of time granted) The greenhouse question is far from being resolved.

Another key principle of ESD, cost-effective and flexible policy instruments, should be adopted. Such instruments include improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms. Do we know that that is going to happen? Mr Humphries said today in question time that he is worried about ACTEW being in control of alternative water treatment systems because it would mean that they would not use their pipes so much. I do not see where there are any kinds of pricing and incentive mechanisms in the mind of Mr Humphries.

Broad decisions and actions should provide for broad community involvement on issues which affect the community. I do not believe that we have had that opportunity, particularly with the Utilities Bill going to a committee but the Assembly being asked to vote on this motion beforehand. It might be tedious for members that I read these ESD principles out, but I am afraid it is too important not to remind members again that these are fundamental principles that people should be taking into account if they think they are taking a responsible approach to policy development. We are making a major

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