Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 10 Hansard (Thursday, 23 September 2010) . . Page.. 4539 ..

Mr Corbell: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) A broad range of ACT Government policies contribute to greenhouse gas emission reductions including those not specifically designed to address climate change. Key actions since 2008-09 are set out in Weathering the Change Action Plan 1 2007 – 2011. These actions were developed by a number of ACT government agencies through research, analysis and consideration of approaches in other jurisdictions, including through consultants where appropriate.

(2) Initiatives to address greenhouse gas reductions are being developed under Weathering the Change Action Plan 2.

In scoping policy options, the Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water (DECCEW) commissioned Kinesis and Heuris Partners. These consultancies cost $230,000.

Two consultants were used for the investigation of an expanded Feed-in –Tariff Scheme: KPMG Econtech and Climate Policy Australia. These consultancies cost $132,043.

(3) Consultants Heuris Partners and Kinesis are energy specialists.

KPMG Econtech is an economic modelling specialist.

Climate Policy Australia has experience in providing climate policy advice to the Australian Government.

(4) There have been 3 new FTE engaged since 2008-09 within DECCEW to work on climate change related to policy development and implementation.

(5) The most recent ACT Greenhouse Gas Inventory relates to 2007-08. The impact of greenhouse gas reduction policies will become apparent in future inventories.

Gungahlin Drive extension—bridge collapse(Question No 1175)

Mr Coe asked the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, upon notice, on 26 August 2010:

(1) In relation to the Gungahlin Drive Extension (GDE) Barton Highway Bridges, for example Stage 1 and Stage 2, (a) when was the Project Concept Brief (i) submitted to cabinet and (ii) approved by Cabinet and (b) what were the expected risks in regard to implementation.

(2) What requirements or guidance did the National Capital Authority give the Department of Territory and Municipal Services (TAMS) or any other ACT Government agency regarding the Stage 2 or Stage 1 bridges.

(3) Were (a) site investigation, (b) architect, (c) landscape architect, (d) quantity surveyor, (e) structural engineer, (f) civil engineer, (g) electrical engineer, (h) mechanical engineer, (i) hydraulic engineer, (j) artist, (k) specialist sub-consultant and (l) testing

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video