Page 674 - Week 02 - Thursday, 20 March 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It is worth highlighting that that cost is offset by other measures that the government is implementing through action plan 2, most significantly through the energy efficiency improvement scheme which is delivering savings to households through energy-saving appliances in the order of approximately $4 per household per week. For many households the savings associated with participation in the energy-efficiency improvement scheme offset or, in some instances, more than offset the costs associated with renewable energy generation through the expansion of the large-scale renewable energy act.
The premise of Ms Lawder and the opposition is a false one and fails to have close regard to the facts. This Assembly has already agreed to refer the operation and implementation of action plan 2, which is the overall strategy for achieving our greenhouse gas reduction targets, to the Standing Committee on Planning, Environment, Territory and Municipal Services. I have every confidence that the questions Ms Lawder has about the implementation of all the aspects of action plan 2, including the deployment to 90 per cent renewable electricity supply, can be asked and answered through that committee inquiry.
It is also worth observing that the Liberal Party’s renewed commitment to at least 30 per cent reduction in our greenhouse gas profile by the year 2020 is a welcome one, but they need to now think about what that means in terms of actions to achieve that abatement. If that is their target, they are going to need to come to grips with what achieving that target means. I assure Ms Lawder and her colleagues that to achieve 30 per cent they are going to need a significant amount of renewable energy generation as well. The government does not support this referral and we will not voting for it.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (4.57): I will not be supporting this referral either today on a number of grounds. The bill itself—we will come to this in a moment when we discuss the legislation—is not that complex in its function. I will not go through the changes now, but the legislation is not technical and does not need that assessment. The feed-in tariff legislation has been in operation for some time now and, in that sense, it is not is an entirely new piece of legislation.
The review of the solar auction undertaken by SKM explores many of the issues associated with the implementation of the legislation, and the government’s response to this inquiry has been made public. So there has been a review of the process.
Finally, aside from the points Minister Corbell has just made, I also note that this Assembly has just agreed to a committee on the implementation of action plan 2, of which this legislation is one of the strands. It is well within the power of that committee, if they wish to look at these matters, to further examine that.
The points Mr Corbell has just made about the costs are very relevant. I will not repeat them other than to say the Greens, too, take the issues of household affordability and balancing those issues very seriously. But I am mindful of the fact that one of the key issues around this legislation is that we will lock in electricity prices for 20 years. It is quite clear that fossil fuel energy prices will go up and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video