❓ Opposition Leader Barnett questions the government's energy reform spending and its impact on power supply reliability, particularly after a recent power crisis. Minister Ripper deflects, avoiding direct answers on costs and instead attacking the opposition's past privatisation proposals.
AnsweredQoN 21Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to the Government’s pursuit of its so-called energy reform in the face of an unprecedented power supply crisis in this State on black Wednesday, 18 February. (1) Approximately how much money has the Government spent to this point on its proposal to break up Western Power? (2) Does the minister concede that his proposed utility reforms have created chaos and confusion within Western Power, leading to the unprecedented power bans on black Wednesday two weeks ago? (3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(1) Approximately how much money has the Government spent to this point on its proposal to break up Western Power? (2) Does the minister concede that his proposed utility reforms have created chaos and confusion within Western Power, leading to the unprecedented power bans on black Wednesday two weeks ago? (3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(2) Does the minister concede that his proposed utility reforms have created chaos and confusion within Western Power, leading to the unprecedented power bans on black Wednesday two weeks ago? (3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(1) Approximately how much money has the Government spent to this point on its proposal to break up Western Power? (2) Does the minister concede that his proposed utility reforms have created chaos and confusion within Western Power, leading to the unprecedented power bans on black Wednesday two weeks ago? (3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(2) Does the minister concede that his proposed utility reforms have created chaos and confusion within Western Power, leading to the unprecedented power bans on black Wednesday two weeks ago? (3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(3) Given the disastrous handling of the power crisis by the Government and Western Power, does the minister concede that it would have been prudent to get his house in order before creating greater upheaval by splitting the utility and replacing one diabolical situation with another? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
(1)-(3) I am very happy to provide to the House the information that the Leader of the Opposition is seeking. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: There has been widespread misunderstanding about the costings of electricity reform because they have all been attributed to the break-up of Western Power. In fact, the major cost in electricity reform is the purchase of the computing system to run the electricity market. That is the issue that needs to be pursued, not the amount that has been spent on the break-up of Western Power. Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: How much? Tell us. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have already said to the Leader of the Opposition that I will provide that information to the House. If he had given me advance warning of a question seeking a detailed breakdown of the costings, I would have provided it. Hopefully, I will be able to provide that information by the end of the day. Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Give us an approximate amount. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Another issue that needs to be looked at is what reform program the other side of politics has for Western Power. We have been discussing what the Leader of the Opposition said in 1998 and the report to the commission. I think we need to look at his plans to privatise Western Power in full - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: The member for Kalgoorlie knows that he must refer to members in this House by their office or seat name. If there is any further calling of names in this House, I will call the member to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: We need to deal with the Leader of the Opposition’s more recent declared support for the privatisation of Western Power in part or in full. The Leader of the Opposition was reported in the Business News of 7 November 2002 as saying that if he had been in power, one of Western Power’s generators would have been privatised by that stage. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: When the Leader of the Opposition was asked in this place on 12 November 2002 which power station he would have privatised if he had been in power, he is reported in Hansard as saying - We consider it could be Muja, it could be Collie; I don’t know. On 9 May 2003 - just last year - he said on the Liam Bartlett radio program that he would have a policy of controlling and trying to reduce debt and that, in doing that, he would not rule out a privatisation, perhaps of a power station. Even as late as October 2003, he said that he did not think that people were spooked by privatisation any longer and that they realised they could have privately run services that had been traditionally government run. As well as the Totalisator Agency Board, the Leader of the Opposition nominated the Collie power station, one of the State’s biggest electricity generators, as an asset that might be sold by a Liberal Government. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I heard the member for Merredin interject. Does the National Party support the privatisation of Western Power in full or in part? Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: That is very interesting. I imagine that is how the coalition negotiations will sound when members discuss a common program that they could possibly agree on to put to the people. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Merredin to order for the first time. Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.G. House interjected. The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: Member! Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr M.J. Birney: You are like that kid at school who keeps coming back for more. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition asked about the impact of electricity reform on reliability and security. We have an ageing power system. We need new, modern power stations on the system. We need investment in the network. Electricity reform, if it had been supported by this Parliament, would have delivered new, modern power stations on the network, and it would have released public funds for investment in the network to provide the quality, reliability and safety of supply that our people, particularly in the country, need. Electricity reform would have added to the reliability and security of electricity supply. It is a great tragedy for this State that the Leader of the Opposition has put his personal obsessions, political position and opportunism above this State’s needs and interests in the areas of economic growth, jobs and development, and the reliability, quality and safety of our electricity supply. I always wonder about the paradoxes of politics. One of the strange paradoxes of politics today is that it is the weaknesses of the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition that have scuttled the Opposition’s support for electricity reform. Had the Leader of the Opposition been just a tad stronger in his position, those people in the Liberal Party who agree with electricity reform would have felt confident enough to support the legislation without causing a political problem in their party. However, because the Leader of the Opposition was weak and has been fighting with his deputy, and because the Liberal Party cannot secure the preselection of frontbenchers and there are problems and disunity, it has had to put the Leader of the Opposition’s political survival above the interests of the State. It is a great tragedy that we have had that position.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.