Page 2010 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 25 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
from distributor generation—for example, solar panels on buildings—was credited at a higher rate than energy bought from the distributor. The action plan goes on to say:
Around the world, renewable energy is being integrated into neighbourhoods and onto buildings. Microgeneration of renewable energy, such as photovoltaic panels, can reduce a building’s energy bills and greenhouse gas emissions.
Currently, there is little incentive to return power to the grid. Increasing the price paid creates an incentive for small-scale generation and over time, reduces the pressure for new electricity distribution infrastructure. This, in turn, results in lower network costs, increased efficiencies and reduced pressure on retail power prices.
Distributed power generation improves energy security and self-sufficiency (particularly where the city’s connections to the National Grid are limited). The feed-in initiative will be available to all residential, commercial and industrial electricity customers.
That is the promise which the government made in relation to this particular policy imitative when we introduced and agreed to and generated weathering the change and the action plan which underpins that plan. What Mr Gentleman has done—and I thank him and congratulate him on behalf of the government—is that he has set about all aspects of the development of a significant policy that reflects the promises that the ACT Labor government has made in relation to this particular issue. He has done a sterling job and has brought us to the position that we are at today where, hopefully tonight, the bill will be agreed to in principle at least.
This is a nation-leading initiative. Indeed, Mrs Dunne continued to parrot quite wrongly and erroneously that this is not a policy that I have supported. It is included in the climate change strategy and action plan which I issued and released a couple of years ago—it is there as action No 18—but I would imagine that Mrs Dunne has probably never read the climate change strategy. Mrs Dunne’s familiarity with any climate change policy would be almost nil in that the Liberal Party has none and never has had one.
Mrs Burke: And you were a bit iffy because you didn’t think of it; Mr Gentleman did. We know what happened there.
MR STANHOPE: What did I just say, Mrs Burke? Have you read action 18 in the climate change strategy? The government will introduce a feed-in tariff, and it has done it. I always smile wryly, of course, when I hear Mrs Dunne and the Liberals talk about their much-vaunted climate change strategy. I think we had this debate once before in the budget year 2001-02. I must say, I think it was Mr Smyth who read out with enormous pride that the then Liberal government, in its last budget before it lost government, committed $240,000—I would have to go back and check the number, I know it was not $1 million—
Mrs Dunne: It was new money. That was new money.
MR STANHOPE: Well, it was new money, but in its final budget for 2001-02 before losing government, the Liberal Party committed $240,000, I think it was, of new
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .