❓ Mrs Roberts questions the Treasurer about electricity tariff increases and their impact on households, accusing him of gouging. The Treasurer defends the increases, arguing they are necessary to address past price freezes and avoid further taxpayer subsidies.
AnsweredQoN 115Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ELECTRICITY TARIFFS — INCREASES
During question time on Tuesday, the Treasurer admitted in response to a question that, rather than freeze electricity prices, he would gouge an extra $3.25 billion from Western Australian households over the next four years. (1) Given that the Treasurer is also requiring a $576 million dividend this year from electricity and the Water Corporation, when will he say, “Enough is enough”, and stop gouging ordinary Western Australians? (2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER
During question time on Tuesday, the Treasurer admitted in response to a question that, rather than freeze electricity prices, he would gouge an extra $3.25 billion from Western Australian households over the next four years. (1) Given that the Treasurer is also requiring a $576 million dividend this year from electricity and the Water Corporation, when will he say, “Enough is enough”, and stop gouging ordinary Western Australians? (2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(1) Given that the Treasurer is also requiring a $576 million dividend this year from electricity and the Water Corporation, when will he say, “Enough is enough”, and stop gouging ordinary Western Australians? (2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(1) Given that the Treasurer is also requiring a $576 million dividend this year from electricity and the Water Corporation, when will he say, “Enough is enough”, and stop gouging ordinary Western Australians? (2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(2) How does the Treasurer explain to mums, dads and pensioners that they must personally pay thousands of dollars for his lack of budget discipline? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
(1)–(2) That is certainly an odd interpretation of the circumstances. Let me start with the issue of dividends. The point has been made by the member for Midland and other members opposite that that is a profit flowing to government. Therefore, if there is a price increase in electricity tariffs, and the dividend is being paid to government, that is a profit to government. Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr E.S. Ripper : An extra dividend, because you increased the payout rates. Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Dividend or extra dividend. The member for Riverton has a good economic understanding. If I give the member for Riverton $100 and he gives me back $25, I have made a $75 loss. That is the situation. If we spend millions and millions of dollars in direct operational subsidies to utility companies so they can actually operate at a profit, and 25 per cent of that profit comes back to us, but the overall profit is dwarfed by the amount of net operating subsidy that we give to the electricity companies, then the government will not have made a profit. All it will have done is mitigate somewhat its already monstrous loss. That is the situation with respect to dividends. They do not represent profits to government in any real sense; they are small mitigations of a massive loss. I will get back to the massive loss. This comes back to the point about the $3.25 billion figure that I have cited. I think that is a very important figure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : It’s how much more you’re going to be ripping out of Western Australian households over the next four years just on their electricity bills—not even including water. Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : That $3.25 billion figure is the cost to taxpayers over the four out years of the budget for the Labor Party’s stated policy of freezing electricity prices. Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Several members interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : The reason average householders in Western Australia are facing this incredibly difficult situation is that electricity prices were frozen for a very long time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
The SPEAKER : The member for Midland has rightly asked a question in this place, to which she is expecting an answer. I do not expect interjections from people on either side of the house to help the member for Midland get her answer. Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : In Western Australia, residential tariffs had not increased since 1997–98. Small business tariffs — Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : They’ve gone up 46 per cent in the last two years. There’s been more than a catch-up, hasn’t there? Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Small business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92; large business tariffs had not increased since 1991–92. With the generation cost of electricity increasing very considerably over that period for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs, delivery of peak load, the transmission network and a range of environmentally positive policies such as the purchase of renewable energy certificates, could anyone reasonably think it was a good idea to freeze prices during that time? We then have to ask ourselves: is it a good idea for consumers in Western Australia for prices to be further frozen? What will inevitably happen when prices are frozen is that future generations of electricity consumers will be left with a bigger cost-reflective gap and the prospect of larger price rises. Alternatively, the government could continually subsidise electricity utilities, and that comes to the issue of the $3.25 billion. If we freeze electricity prices it would mean a zero increase over the next four years and, of course, it was zero increases that got us into this problem. If we were determined to go back to the future and renew the freeze on electricity prices policy, it would cost the taxpayers of Western Australia $3.25 billion. There is no such thing as free electricity. What is not made up for in prices has to be made up for by the taxpayers of Western Australia directly subsidising the utilities. The single biggest piece of economic vandalism wrought by that policy is that there will still be a massive gulf between the price of electricity and the cost of generating it, and there is no incentive for competition to enter the market. The whole point of disaggregation was to present an opportunity for competition to enter the market. Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr P.B. Watson : Do you stand in front of the mirror every morning and talk to yourself? You are boring us to death! Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Mr Speaker, I have given a fair answer to their question. The point is that this government took a very, very difficult decision on electricity prices over the last 18 months. Western Australian consumers can expect to not receive increments of the type they have had over the last 18 months. The fact remains that without some modest increase in the price of electricity, taxpayers would find themselves in a position in which the state could not afford hospitals, schools and roads because, instead, we wanted to try to subsidise and promote near free electricity, and that would not be good financial management.
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.