Page 4989 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.43): Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. We certainly would not want that. I am pleased that I have to speak up because Mr Hargreaves often criticises the volume with which I speak, so I am happy to put a bit of oomph into it this time for him. We will be supporting the Greens’ amendment for a couple of reasons. As I pointed out, we have a related target in the bill that we are debating cognately here. Clause 7(a) and (b) has related targets. Subclause (a) is a proportion of renewable electricity and (b) is to reduce by 31 December 2020 the per capita use of electricity in the ACT by at least 25 per cent to a per capita use of electricity in the ACT that is equal to or less than 75 per cent of 1990 levels.
So we do agree that energy efficiency is very important in terms of meeting targets. It is one of the most cost-effective ways and it is one of the most sensible ways. It is the way that I think is most readily embraced by the community, because they see a direct benefit in terms of their financial situation straightaway if it is done right. So there are a number of reasons for having a focus on energy efficiency targets.
It is worth making the point that, whilst we certainly do not have it for all of the discussions we have in terms of targets, I think it is reasonable that we take into account the per capita. We cannot simply ignore the fact that the population is growing, and that brings with it different challenges in terms of reducing emissions. All of those extra people need to get around. All of those people need to heat their homes in winter and cool their homes in summer, so that does provide greater challenges. I think the per capita is important. I think that energy efficiency is important. As I said, it is something that is outlined in our legislation. It sets a specific target and, therefore, we have no problem with supporting this amendment.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (10.45): I rise to speak briefly to again clarify some of the details of this amendment in light of Mr Corbell’s comments. He particularly made reference to the source of energy, and I want to clarify that the amendment specifically states:
The Minister must determine targets for the per person use of electricity (other than electricity generated from renewable energy sources) in the ACT.
I think the point Mr Corbell was making was correct in the sense that, obviously, renewable energy should not be included in that, if that is where the source is coming from. That is a point that we had picked up from an earlier discussion with Mr Corbell’s office and adjusted the language of this specific amendment accordingly. I think that that point is covered, and I just wanted to clarify that for the purposes of the debate.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (10.46): Just to clarify, the government recognises and agrees strongly that energy efficiency will play a vital role in achieving our greenhouse gas reductions. However, the mechanism proposed by the Greens in terms of reporting in the legislation is one we believe is a very crude mechanism for the reasons that I have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video