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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 866 ..

MR QUINLAN (continuing):

While I am on my feet, Mr Speaker, I foreshadow that I am going to move several amendments to the Bill. I may as well speak to the foreshadowed amendments now, to save myself rising again. I received, at a very late hour of course, a copy of a letter to Mr Mackay from Stephen Skehill, Special Counsel, to ACTEW, which is largely a demolition job on the amendments I will be putting forward. Anybody who has had any association with a court case knows that there are generally two sides, and quite often your lawyer will tell you, "This is the best assessment we can give you to suit your particular position".

I do not know where that leaves us. ACTEW's special counsel is effectively trying to drive a truck through these amendments. These amendments were prepared by the ACT Parliamentary Counsel. They are the product of a number of iterations in dealing with that counsel to try to get the words right. I will run through the intent of them and I will leave it to the Assembly to decide exactly how they will handle them. I suspect that on the numbers they will get rolled, but I think some of them are quite - - -

MR SPEAKER: You cannot move them yet, Mr Quinlan. We are still at the in-principle stage.

MR QUINLAN: I am just speaking to them. I have just described them.

MR SPEAKER: Okay.

MR QUINLAN: You do not want me to speak twice tonight do you, Mr Speaker?

MR SPEAKER: As you were.

MR QUINLAN: The first amendment I foreshadow is largely a provision that I received advice ought to be incorporated into legislation like this. It virtually indemnifies us against any damages lawsuit if the negotiations go pear shape at some future time, which I doubt. I think it is a responsible measure to include in the legislation.

The second amendment attempts to create a link between this Bill and the Utilities Bill. This Bill confers upon the new, merged organisation an unfettered right of entry. I am aware that there are provisions in the Utilities Bill that do control entry onto property. I do not know which Act will take precedence or under which Act someone could storm onto my property at 4 am, ostensibly to fix something. All I have tried to do, with the advice of the Parliamentary Counsel, is to create a link between this Bill and the Utilities Bill. The latter Bill does apply restrictions to access by people representing utilities and ensures that utilities behave responsibly. In some areas at least, we have legislation that will control what is going on.

My other amendments are mainly designed to cover those assets that are not undertaking assets. We have talked in large part about what ACTEW does. We have talked about their electricity assets and their water assets. The Bill is fairly specific, which leaves in no-man's-land other assets of ACTEW such as the real estate it owns - ACTEW House, some of the large depots that it has north and south, and the equipment that goes with operating the utility. I am concerned that we have at least some measure of control over

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