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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 352 ..

MR QUINLAN (continuing):

went on to say that greater economies of scale could be achieved by, I presume, adding gas distribution to this body. Is that the reason, and effectively the only reason, for dismissing this particular expression of interest? Are we contemplating all of the changes in relation to ownership of assets and forfeiture of 50 per cent of ownership of assets to achieve this questionable and marginal economies of scale that might accrue for the addition of the local gas business to the water and sewerage?

MR HUMPHRIES: My answer to this question is largely the same as the previous answer. The Government entrusted the ACTEW board with the task of processing the expressions of interest. Their brief was to assess which of the proposals that were being put forward under that expression of interest process would produce the best opportunity for ACTEW to be positioned more securely in its marketplace and to lower its exposure to risk. That kind of brief led the ACTEW board, a very competent board, to examine the issues surrounding the various expressions of interest with some care.

The resulting short list, as I think I mentioned in the previous sittings of the Assembly, consisted of four organisations or consortia, one of which was AGL. I take it that the reasons for ACTEW considering or not considering certain of these proposals were based on the commercial experience of the members of the ACTEW board. I am happy to ascertain the reasons that the board took the decision it did on the particular matter that Mr Quinlan and Mr Osborne have raised.

MR QUINLAN: I ask a supplementary question. We were talking earlier about the evaluation that was tabled in the house. I have it here. I think for comparison purposes I should hold up the document that evaluates one proposal, that for GSE. The document the Minister referred to evaluates 29. Can we presume, Treasurer, that we can look forward to a report relating to AGL that details the economies to scale in a way that compares, in its depth and seriousness, with the comprehensiveness of the other report I have, as opposed to what we have been given so far?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, let me correct something Mr Quinlan has said. The press release that you have held up is not the full evaluation of the various expressions of interest. That is a summary provided by the Government to ensure that there was a measure of transparency in the process of considering each of those expressions of interest. The expressions of interest themselves were put forward, I assume, almost exclusively, if not exclusively, on a commercially confidential basis.

You tell me how else you consider sensitive proposals from major Australian and overseas companies seeking to come to some kind of financial relationship with ACTEW without supplying commercially sensitive information. Clearly that process engaged those kinds of issues, and clearly the ACTEW board had to sit down and sift through those with all the information in front of it to assess what appeared to be the best options to pursue in more detail. It did that. It went through that entire list and selected companies or consortia to do further work with.

What the Government published was a summary of those expressions of interest. If you think that we assessed each company on the basis of about half a page of evaluation, then you have a very strange idea of what a thorough assessment of those matters amounts to by a board of the competency of the ACTEW Corporation board.

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