Page 1926 - Week 05 - Thursday, 3 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development) (11.50): Pursuant to standing order 182A(b), I seek leave to move amendments to this bill which are minor and technical in nature.
Leave granted.
MR CORBELL: I move amendments Nos 1 to 4 circulated in my name together [see schedule 2 at page 1999].
Recent changes in the large scale electricity contract market have necessitated a number of minor amendments to this bill. The bill as it stands provides a simplified obligation for suppliers with sales of less than 500 gigawatt hours per annum. I am proposing that the bill be amended and that the simplified obligation may also be accessed by suppliers of fewer than 5,000 customers, which is the same threshold that applies in Victoria. This does not affect the obligations of any suppliers under current market conditions. It allows for greater flexibility for suppliers selling exclusively to large commercial customers to grow their market share without triggering an obligation to deliver energy efficiency services in the residential sector.
While the amendments are minor and technical in nature, the government believes it is important they are adopted to provide the greatest possible level of certainty for industry moving forward. The amendments also address a number of minor matters raised in the scrutiny of bills committee report No 51. The amendments allow the Assembly to disallow codes of practice issued by the scheme administrator in relation to health, safety and environment issues and clarify the basis on which the administrator may require information from a supplier. I commend the amendments to the Assembly.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (11.52): I will briefly respond to Mr Corbell, because he is trying to put forward a falsehood, and he has done that on a number of occasions. We asked his officials specifically about the issue of big business. Initially they referred to small and medium enterprises, and so I asked for clarification. I asked, “Will it just be limited to small and medium enterprises?” The answer I got was, “Well, there aren’t really any big businesses in Canberra.” That was corrected by me and another official who said, “Well, actually there are many big businesses who have premises here in Canberra, and they would be eligible.” It was made absolutely clear to us, and there is nothing in this legislation to prevent it, that big business—whether it be Costco, whether it be Woolworths, whether it be Westfield—will be eligible under this scheme.
Mr Corbell can try and pretend that it is not true, but we specifically asked the question and we were told that that was the answer. That is the issue: Mr Corbell is embarrassed by the fact that we have highlighted that. It was highlighted in the briefing; it was confirmed in the briefing. No amount of trying to skirt around it will change that fact, and that is why we do not support the legislation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video