Page 1953 - Week 05 - Thursday, 5 May 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
forward to see it get taken on board without needing some terrible sense of ownership. Unfortunately, the first of those was not taken up, and that was that the government adequately resource an advocate in the community sector to advocate on emerging energy policy issues. This was the subject of a Greens’ budget bid of some $98,000. We believe that was a small amount of money to empower the community sector to advocate on energy policy. It is an incredibly complex area. It is a difficult one for many people to get their heads around and we believe that the community sector would really benefit from having such a position. It is something hopefully we can re-examine in the future.
But on a more positive note, a number of measures have been picked up. We asked for an increase in the energy concession to a level commensurate with energy price increases since 2005 and I think this is one of the most significant initiatives in the budget from the government to help low income households in the ACT. The increase of around $130 a year is very welcome. I think it will make a significant difference to people who are struggling to meet the rising cost of energy and I welcome that. At the time we also suggested to the government they establish a mechanism by which percentage increases in energy prices are automatically applied to the energy concession each year. Whilst I have not seen that detail yet, I hope it is there and, if not, that the government does consider building that in as part of the story.
We also suggested extending the methodology of the WEST program to other people who are socially or financially disadvantaged. This has been a very successful program and again I am pleased to see that the government has extended that program with an additional $4.4 million in what is called West Plus. This is particularly helpful for targeting low income families that are socially or financially disadvantaged to help them with energy efficiency.
This is a very strategic investment because the cheapest unit of electricity—we have heard a lot of talk, from Mr Seselja particularly, some of it factual, some of it not so, about electricity prices—is the unit you never have to buy. By targeting needy households with energy efficiency that is exactly what we are doing for them and I congratulate the government for including that in the budget.
We also suggested ensuring that people who are socially and financially disadvantaged be specifically targeted in all energy efficiency policies and programs implemented by the government and I think the increase in investment in energy efficiency measures for public housing meets that criterion. Again that is a welcome inclusion in the budget.
Let me turn now to broader environment issues, particularly issues of biodiversity and our nature reserves, because the budget has delivered some new funding on this front as well. Nonetheless I remain concerned that solving the chronic problems of weeds, feral animals and erosion requires a more comprehensive rethink about how our nature reserves are managed. They are one of the absolute jewels in the crown when it comes to this city and are highly valued by residents right across the city. We have seen some new initiatives, with $1.8 million over four years for pest plant management. This will go some way to delivering the high priority projects that were previously held over because of a lack of funding.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video