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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (9 March) . . Page.. 748 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

Service is not improving. Beyond any doubt, that is the model that we seem set to adopt. I think we were all staggered when the chief executive said, "This is a social good". Can you believe it? A disgraceful comment.

In respect of this joint venture, I have seen no evidence yet that this Government will adequately protect the public investment in ACTEW. It therefore gives me no confidence that the proposal will protect the consumer. Recently the Government tabled its Utilities Bill, designed to protect the consumer, it says. Let me acknowledge that it certainly does, and it brings the gas utility into the fold. As I read the Bill, it is mostly to do with protecting the utilities. It spells out in great detail their rights and what they can do, and of course it puts limitations on those rights when they want to enter properties and the like. The Bill is mostly about looking after the utilities. There certainly is progress in bringing to the gas utility some sort of measure when people are no longer able to pay an account. I have in front of me, at page 79 of the Utilities Bill, the complaints that people may bring forward. They are pretty limited. They are mostly to do with cutting off the power or gas and the ability to take some action in that area.

But let us take it beyond that. Nowhere in the Utilities Bill is there provision to secure the access to, and the help from, the utility that I have been used to and that members have been used to. Forget about the complaints provisions in the Bill. We have occasions to go to ACTEW on quite a few issues. If a constituent comes to me and says that the streetlights are out or one streetlight is out, I have been able to ring ACTEW and get a very quick response. Will I still get that response? I have been able to ring up on behalf of constituents and say, "So-and-so is concerned about the safety of a power pole or some power lines", and there has been a very quick response. That is not the sort of thing that is listed in the complaints provisions. I had occasion once to make a call about a cat stuck up a pole. I have been able to get quick responses in an informal, effective way. They are consumer interests. The power poles and lines people have complained to me about have always been quite safe, but it is important to allay any concerns consumers might have.

Let me give you a more significant example not covered in the Utilities Bill. In the last month I was contacted by a constituent who had all his plans signed to put an extension on his house and suddenly they discovered a glitch. The plan went over an ACTEW easement. It was not my constituent's fault and it certainly was not ACTEW's fault that it was not picked up. My constituent, who is an owner/builder, went to ACTEW and said, "Hey, I have a problem. I have bought all this material. I have $30,000 worth of gear arriving on my front footpath. What can I do?". He had a very polite and considerate response from ACTEW over the counter: "Sorry, mate. You are stuck". He came to me and I rang John Mackay and arranged a meeting on the site with a good ACTEW engineer who acted very properly and in the end very well, and we sorted out the problem. That constituent would never have got through on his own efforts. He needed something to facilitate that. I thank ACTEW for what they did. That sort of facility that members have had over the years to work with ACTEW has been very helpful.

Mr Humphries: What is your point?

MR WOOD: Will it happen in the future, Mr Humphries?

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