Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (26 November) . . Page.. 3091 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

That is a possible outcome of the implementation of a water allocations regime. It is that sort of process which I think everyone in the Canberra community should have an enormous deal of concern about, particularly in light of the question mark over whether or not we will continue to manage our water resources in a public ownership model or in some form of contracting out or privatised ownership model. Those two factors combined cast real uncertainty over how our water resources are going to be managed into the future and whether or not they are going to be managed in the best interests of the Territory in terms of their allocations for use within, and potentially outside of, the Territory.

The Government has suggested that water allocations, in combination with a licence system and the use of environmental flow guidelines, will provide the greatest possible level of environmental protection. I would argue that this position fails to recognise that the water allocations proposal is closely tied to provisions to allow for the trading and sale of such allocations and that this is probably the most significant potential change to the management and demand for the Territory's water resources.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to draw a hypothetical scenario which I have the greatest concern about and which I have also outlined in my dissenting report, and that is the possibility that, under a private or franchise ownership/management model for the Territory's water, the Territory's domestic supply could be seen as quite a highly marketable commodity and it could potentially be seen as that to population centres outside of the ACT.

Because of the quality and volume of our supply, there is every possibility that a supplier or an operator of our water supply could choose, in a competitive water market, to seek to sell our water outside of the Territory, with the result that the supply available for Canberra itself could be diminished. This presents a real possibility, Mr Deputy Speaker, that other population centres may choose to postpone, or indeed cancel, the necessary infrastructure work they are required to undertake to satisfy their own water requirements. Instead, they will choose to draw on the Territory's supply through an arrangement with a private supplier who is managing our water resources and undermine the ability of the ACT to meet its own future needs.

The consequences of that sort of situation, perhaps not now but into the future, are extremely serious. As the Territory continues to grow, as the size of our city continues to expand, which we all hope it will, the consequences for overcommitting our supply as a result of the allocations regime is something that I do not think the Government has been able to address, either in its explanations to the Bill itself or in the information it was able to provide to the Urban Services Committee in its inquiry.

For that reason, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Labor Opposition will not be supporting the provisions of this Bill that deal with allocations. The Government may come back and say that that is irresponsible. The Government may come back and say that an allocations regime is essential to good environmental management of our water supply. We are prepared to contend that the licensing regime can be used in an effective way to deal with the issues to do with effective management of our water resources, and that the risks associated with allocations outweigh the benefits in light of the potential changes to the tradeability, if you like, of water in what is to become, plainly, a competitive market.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .