❓ Question regarding electricity price increases due to Western Power reforms and safety nets for pensioners/concession holders. Minister deflects, criticising the Liberal Party's alternative reform model and past privatisation efforts.
AnsweredQoN 1335Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Mr Speaker, I thank you for your indulgence. I was a little interested in the last answer given by the Minister for Health, as children’s health and development is an area of major interest to me and certainly not of low priority. I refer the minister to an article in last Monday’s edition of The Australian , which outlined a new plan by the South Australian Government to provide pensioners and concession card holders with an extra $50 a year to combat soaring electricity prices. (1) Will the minister guarantee that electricity prices will not increase under the proposed reforms to break up Western Power? (2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
I refer the minister to an article in last Monday’s edition of The Australian , which outlined a new plan by the South Australian Government to provide pensioners and concession card holders with an extra $50 a year to combat soaring electricity prices. (1) Will the minister guarantee that electricity prices will not increase under the proposed reforms to break up Western Power? (2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(1) Will the minister guarantee that electricity prices will not increase under the proposed reforms to break up Western Power? (2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will -
Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year.
I refer the minister to an article in last Monday’s edition of The Australian , which outlined a new plan by the South Australian Government to provide pensioners and concession card holders with an extra $50 a year to combat soaring electricity prices. (1) Will the minister guarantee that electricity prices will not increase under the proposed reforms to break up Western Power? (2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(1) Will the minister guarantee that electricity prices will not increase under the proposed reforms to break up Western Power? (2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(2) If not, will the minister undertake to provide a safety net to pensioners and concession card holders to ensure that they are not out of pocket following the changes? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
(1)-(2) I have said that our reform model will create downward pressure on electricity prices. All the advice available to the Government from the Electricity Reform Task Force and from Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd is that the competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices if there is genuine competition in the market. However, the debate in this place has revealed a new danger. The new danger is the reform model now proposed by the Liberal Party. A number of things could happen if we go into a competitive electricity market with the stapled retail-generation entity proposed by the Liberal Party. It is possible that nobody else would come into the electricity market because of the Liberal Party’s fear that the stapled retail-generation entity would have such dominance that it would be able to misuse its market power and therefore disadvantage new entrants. The first possibility is that we would spend a lot of money to establish a competitive electricity market and no-one would turn up to participate in that market because the Liberals’ reform model had not addressed the question of market dominance and the misuse of market power. The second awful possibility is that a misuse of market power by the stapled retail-generation entity would occur - not just threaten to occur - and we would have spent all the money on establishing an electricity market, but prices would rise because of the misuse of market power by that retail-generation entity. Those are the possibilities under the Liberals’ reform model, which is why it is necessary to separate retail from generation. The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will - Dr G.I. Gallop: Who got rid of the uniform tariff? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
The competitive electricity market will drive down electricity prices. The competitive electricity market will not, of itself, cause electricity prices to rise. Consumers will be protected by a retail price cap backed by law. The Government will determine retail prices and, in addition, consumers will be protected by the uniform tariff, or price equality, which will -
Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition threatened the uniform tariff when he was Minister for Energy. Under our reform model, the uniform tariff will be sustainably funded and backed by law into the future and the interests of pensioners will be protected by the maintenance of pensioner concessions. Considering all those circumstances, this question amounts to silly scaremongering by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s official reform model creates the danger. I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
I will take a moment of the House’s time to outline the unofficial reform model of the Liberal Party. It was revealed in an article by a very important journalist, Paul Armstrong, in The West Australian of 27 March 1998. The article was titled “Barnett flags sale of ripe AlintaGas”. We know that he went on to privatise AlintaGas without ever having taken the matter to the electorate in an election. It was interesting what the article stated about Western Power - Mr Barnett has also foreshadowed a partial privatisation of Western Power, though the Government would not attempt this until after the election. The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year. There was another interesting comment from government sources. The article goes on to state - Government sources said Mr Barnett’s faith in privatisations had been boosted strongly by the huge price paid by Epic Energy for the pipeline. That was a huge policy success! On the one hand an official Liberal position has been put in this debate, which could mean our receiving much reduced benefits from electricity reform, or even price increases if they had their way. On the other hand, an unofficial reform program was revealed by Paul Armstrong in 1998 stating that what the former Government really want to do was sell 49 per cent of Western Power.
The sale of a 49 per cent stake in Western Power is expected to raise well over $1 billion based on net earnings of $98.7 million last financial year.
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.