Page 3312 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The other important outcome of this policy is the economic savings it will produce for households. An electric storage hot-water system costs the average household hundreds of dollars a year. It varies depending on whether it is a one or two-person household or a bigger household, but no matter what type of household it is, a solar gas-boosted system will provide hundreds of dollars worth of savings per year for a household. Yes, there are some further up-front costs, but let us sort out how to make that possible. There is a whole bunch of federal government rebates out there. Why aren’t we taking advantage of those in the ACT? This is about saving money for households on an ongoing basis.
This policy will create jobs for electric hot-water efficient system installers in the ACT. This afternoon the government will bring on a motion to congratulate the government on how much they are doing for small business. Yet here is a policy that could generate additional small business here in the ACT and the government do not want to have a bar of it—because they are too damned lazy to engage; they are too churlish to say in their agreement that this is a good idea but they will not actually support it.
It makes me wonder whether Mr Barr is, in fact, a closet climate sceptic, whether he is secretly a fan of Steve Fielding. I am reminded that it was the Labor Party, with its dodgy preference deals in Victoria, that put Steve Fielding in the Senate. It does not like to admit it very often, but the Labor Party put Steve Fielding in the Senate because it was not prepared to have a Green in the Senate, and the Labor Party has to live with that every single time it gets done over by Mr Fielding in the Senate. It is ironic, isn’t it? It would really be quite entertaining if it was not so serious because Mr Fielding is blocking climate action in the Senate, just as Mr Barr, his like-minded climate sceptic, is blocking progress on greenhouse actions here in the ACT.
For Mr Barr to stand up and say, “We support this policy, but we will not support it,” is simply embarrassing. I actually found Mr Barr’s speech somewhat confusing. He said that the substance of this bill is poor. He said the policy is fine but the substance is poor. Well, where are the amendments, Mr Barr? If you think there are flaws, let us see your amendments.
Mr Barr: Scrap it and start again, like you did the second time. If you got a third bill, you might get it right the third time. It has got to be about putting your—
MR RATTENBURY: I will remember that. The next time the government brings in a bill that has got some problems, we will say, “Scrap it and start again.” No, let us actually deal with a piece of the legislation when it is on the table, because that is the purpose of this place.
Let us talk about the Liberal Party here. I do not agree with some of the things Mr Seselja is putting on the table. I think he is missing the point as well. I think it is because he is —
Mr Barr: Fielding is voting with the Greens to stop the ETS, isn’t he? Yes.
MR RATTENBURY: Well, that is because your ETS is a dog’s breakfast anyway. While I disagree with some of the things Mr Seselja said, at least the Liberal Party has
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .