Page 3307 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
As it stands, we will support the bill in principle. We will be seeking that this debate be adjourned at the detail stage so that we can discuss some of these amendments. But our amendments will be to honour our election policy and ensure that we do not place an unreasonable cost burden on those Canberra families who can least afford it.
We need to move forward in a sensible manner on this issue. We need to do it in a way that does not unduly burden low income families, in particular, but the principle of new dwellings having low-energy hot-water systems is one we support and therefore we will support the bill in principle.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (10.53): I do not think there is any disagreement in this place that the phase-out of high emissions intensity hot-water systems is an absolutely necessary policy step. There is no disagreement on that from the government’s perspective and it does not sound like there is disagreement from any side of the Assembly. The issue, of course, is how it is done and the issue, of course, is to make sure that industry, consumers and users of these hot-water systems are prepared for the transition.
Contrary to the assertions made by the Greens and Mr Seselja in this debate, this has actually been an issue that has been worked on by this government and by governments around the country for over the last 12 months. A very detailed process of engagement with industry has been occurring at a national level, primarily through the officials group that supports the Ministerial Council on Energy, of which I am the ACT’s representative.
At the Ministerial Council on Energy’s meeting on 12 December last year, well before the Greens introduced this bill, the national hot-water strategic framework was agreed. That included the following measures: from 2010, to phase out the use of conventional electric resistance water heaters from all new homes and established homes in gas-reticulated areas; from 2012, all new flats and apartments in gas-reticulated areas and established houses in non-gas-reticulated areas; a number of other measures, including minimum energy performance standards for the types of water heaters such as gas, solar, heat pump and small electric systems that will continue to be available; and finally, measures to ensure harmonisation, information, education that would support the introduction of these measures.
That was the decision taken by all jurisdictions in December last year, including the ACT. Since that time, detailed work has commenced on a detailed regulatory impact statement to be approved by the Office of Best Practice Regulation in the commonwealth government that will support a national and uniform move to phase out these systems.
I think what is particularly disappointing about this debate is the lack of recognition from the mover of this bill that this work has actually been going on for some time and there is a clear time frame agreed by all governments. In many respects, what this bill represents is simply, unfortunately, a case of me-too-ism, a case of “we know you are doing it but we are just going to do it a little bit earlier”. At the end of the day, that is what this debate is about.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .