Page 2630 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 2 July 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
to see that, of course. Over that period of time, the amounts will be reviewed by the minister each time. We want to ensure that electricity consumers in the ACT are not hardly done by as a result of this legislation, especially those who are less able to afford it. I have written to the Deputy Chief Minister, asking that the potential costs of the feed-in tariff be taken into consideration when undertaking the concession scheme review. We believe the cost for that particular group of people would be covered under the concession scheme review.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 12, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 13.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella) (5.02): I will be opposing this clause. To assist Dr Foskey and the opposition, I am moving to omit this clause and clause 14 to update the bill. They deal with the Independent and Regulatory Commission Act 1997. Under the national electricity market arrangements, this act does not regulate electricity prices, so these clauses are irrelevant.
Clause 13 negatived.
Clause 14.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella) (5.05): I oppose clause 14 for the same reason that I opposed clause 13—that is, under the national energy market arrangements, the Independent and Regulatory Commission Act does not regulate electricity.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.05): I seek leave to move amendments Nos 12 and 13 circulated in my name together.
Leave granted.
DR FOSKEY: I move amendment Nos 12 and 13 circulated in my name together [see schedule 2 at page 2659].
The Greens, as well as the government, I understand, want to ensure that the feed-in tariff does not impact negatively on low-income earners. I am sorry that Mr Mulcahy has gone, because he might have supported this amendment. It has been shown that low-income households will be most affected by the consequences of climate change simply because they are likely to live in the least energy-efficient houses, have the least financial capacity to adapt, and their cars and appliances are likely to be more expensive to run and so on. There is strong evidence that low-income households on average use around half the energy in annual consumption tonnes as high-income households do. Even so, they spend a greater percentage of their income on energy bills. It seems that a proportional levy rather than a stepped rate is being proposed.
The Greens believe low-income households should be exempt from price increases, as any increases will, as I explained, impact these low-income households much more than others. We are aware that a concessions review is in progress, and it should be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .