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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (29 June) . . Page.. 2206 ..

MR QUINLAN (10.44), in reply: I close the debate by responding to the Chief Minister. Let me assure the Assembly that this matter was discussed between the committee, representatives of ACTEW and the probity auditor. As Mr Kaine said yesterday, the probity auditor indicated that he was quite happy for his report to be delivered to the Assembly, and expected that it would be delivered at the same time as we delivered our interim report. It is a bit disturbing to see that the government's reflex action is to tell the Assembly nothing.

What is more important, though, is that a comprehensive report is being prepared by ACTEW which, by their word, contains probably one page that they would want suppressed, and that relates to arrangements for energy trading, which they consider should remain confidential and would not want competitors to see. That is eminently logical. What was discussed between ACTEW and the committee was virtually the distribution to Assembly members of the remainder of that report, which informs on the progress in all of the areas that make up this particular project.

I think it is appalling that the most important financial business decision made in this territory since local government is being implemented and the Assembly is effectively not being informed on it. We as a committee conducted our role and attempted to inform the Assembly, as is our duty, on what we had done and gave assurances where necessary to the Assembly, which we are obliged to do. This project has ramifications. The end product that we will get out of this project is not exactly the product that was touted when the Assembly made that decision. There are arrangements that leave the ACT open to some forms of risk. There are arrangements that will leave the new ACT utility subject to a related party arrangement whereby their shareholder will also be their sole supplier in gas and electricity.

If the government is not prepared to inform this Assembly, then I would expect members of this Assembly to react strongly against that. If they do not, if members of this Assembly do not care about how this arrangement is being implemented and what its impact is going to be, that is a very sad commentary on the way this Assembly operates. I think the government is obliged to table all of that report except the areas that should be commercial-in-confidence, which boil down to a column on a page in a quite comprehensive report. Don't you know what is going on?

I commend my motion to the Assembly, satisfied in the knowledge that at least the Finance and Public Administration Committee is doing its job in relation to informing the Assembly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

MR OSBORNE (10.49): Pursuant to standing order 128, I fix the next sitting Thursday for moving the motion to disallow Subordinate Law 2000 No 19 made under the Epidemiological Studies (Confidentiality) Act 1992, relating to a prescribed study for the supervised injecting place trial.

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