❓ Question regarding the Labor Party's election commitment to provide uniform electricity tariffs to regional areas, specifically addressing the discrepancy between cost of supply tariffs and uniform rates. The Minister acknowledges the issue and discusses potential solutions, including a community service obligation.
AnsweredQoN 152Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ELECTRICITY, UNIFORM TARIFF TO REGIONAL AREAS
Given that the Labor Party’s electricity reform policy before the election was to require Western Power to supply all regional customers at the relevant uniform tariff rate, does the Minister acknowledge that - (1) Many customers in the region pay a cost of supply tariff for electricity of 36.42c a unit, which is double the uniform tariff rate? (2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER
Given that the Labor Party’s electricity reform policy before the election was to require Western Power to supply all regional customers at the relevant uniform tariff rate, does the Minister acknowledge that - (1) Many customers in the region pay a cost of supply tariff for electricity of 36.42c a unit, which is double the uniform tariff rate? (2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(1) Many customers in the region pay a cost of supply tariff for electricity of 36.42c a unit, which is double the uniform tariff rate? (2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(1) Many customers in the region pay a cost of supply tariff for electricity of 36.42c a unit, which is double the uniform tariff rate? (2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(2) The most accountable and effective way to honour the Government’s election commitment is to introduce a community service obligation for the supply of electricity to all customers in areas identified as non-profitable? Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
Mr RIPPER replied: I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
I thank the Leader of the National Party for some notice of this question. (1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(1) The Government’s policy commitment was to ensure regional customers pay the same relevant tariff as metropolitan customers. On 6 June the Premier announced that the uniform tariff on commercial tariffs would be restored for regional businesses. I am advised that Western Power has various arrangements with its regional customers that are designed to reflect the different circumstances of those customers. For some customers outside town systems, the high cost of supply may be recovered with charges greater than the uniform tariff. Typically, large customers have contract arrangements similar to large customers supplied from the south west and north west interconnected systems. (2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
(2) A community service obligation arrangement would be a more transparent and accountable way of providing for the financing of any subsidies that might be applicable in the system. However, we must recognise that if a community service obligation is funded from outside the electricity system, it would be funded from the other taxes that are applied to business, such as stamp duty, land taxes and so on. That is a particular problem. At the very least we should have a community service obligation mechanism that, while it is not funded from outside the electricity system, at least makes it clear to people where the payments are going and what are the cross subsidies. That is something I will ask the electricity reform task force to examine. I support the transparency and accountability that can be achieved from a community service obligation arrangement. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the cost, but the Leader of the National Party backs up my argument made. These things must be funded either from within the electricity system through cross subsidies or by other taxes on business.
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.