Senate inquiry into the performance and management of electricity network companies

The Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications has commenced publishing the submissions which it received on the performance and management of electricity network companies. The committee is due to report on this matter by the first sitting day in March.

Senate Inquiry webpage

SSMA’s submission is Number 52

To read this submission and other SSMA submissions go to our submissions page.

This entry was posted in Smart Meter and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Senate inquiry into the performance and management of electricity network companies

  1. Eric says:

    Allowing the customer to do their own meter readings is very viable indeed.
    It happens in WA and here’s the glossy brochure.

    Click to access self-read-meter-customers.pdf

  2. John V says:

    The extra charge for reading a “Non standard” meter is not valid. The current contract for analogue meters includes the cost of reading the meter, therefore any extra charge is invalid. If they wish to charge for a reading then they have to reduce the cost of the service charge already being imposed by the equivalent amount. Ergo, no change to contract cost. QED. (I hope).

  3. Happy Dissenter says:

    Let the whinging commence for the smart meter customers. “Energy companies turn up the heat” ~

    • Peter says:

      It appears that the two distributors proposing this ‘tax’ are the two distributors which get the most complaints on this site, Jemena and United Energy. Rest assured, if they get away with this blatant rip off, the others will follow!
      As this charge is based on Time of Use, clearly, they can only impose this tax on customers with surveillance and control devises, they call them ‘smart meters’ and as the Government of Victoria Incorporated have recently declared that surveillance and control devises are NOT compulsory, (and actually never have been) by allowing the distributors to slug ‘refusers’ an extra charge for not having one, which ever way you look at it, this may well be another case of discrimination, the distributor cannot impose the same tax on customers who do not have a surveillance devise, which they are paying for but do not have, but because other customers DO have these devices, they will be subjected to an additional tax on their house hold electrical appliances!
      If you refer to my submissions on October the 19th and November 25 last year, you will see that a customer can require the distributor to fit a none standard meter, distributors claim that their ‘standard meter’ is a surveillance and control devise. There is NO LEGAL reason for the distributor to refuse the customer. From the response to my posts, it appears that no one has used this piece of legislation.
      I believe, if the distributors are allowed to apply this tax, it is just the thin edge of the wedge, with the data collected by these surveillance devises, distributors will be able to apply a tax on the use of each and every house hold appliance, in effect controlling your lives within your own home!!!!!!!

    • Eric says:

      There has indeed been a reference in recent news items to “smart meter customers”. Now that’s a nice little bit of of spin isn’t it ? It hides the fact that these smart meter customers are totally involuntary customers who had these in every way toxic devices forcefully imposed upon them. No they are all happy little customers aren’t they ? They chose to be our smart meter customers. Oh, so it wasn’t really the law that you had to accept one then………… Don’t worry you maggots, just keep going the way you are and you will soon lose all your customers. There will not be anyone left for you to flog your hairbrained schemes to anymore.

      • Happy Dissenter says:

        Today the water meter reader came to my place and we chatted about my locked gate and the smart meter issue. He told me…”Well you know you will have to get one one day. That’s the way the world is going. They will just make your bills more expensive. There are not many analogues left” He stopped dead in his tracks when I said that there is no justification for government to push a private business product onto householders and that there were plenty of analogues in Victoria due to my information from SSMA forum. He said “Well, they will make legislation for it.” Then I said “Why is there no legislation now after all these years? Answer, because the politicians are not able to make it law and they know it.” He was on one side of the fence and I was inside so ironically, he asked me to read him out my water usage numbers. 🙂 I said to him, “Why can’t I take a photo of my analogue and send it to the company?” He didn’t have an answer for that either and commented that he was retiring soon. Not his problem.

  4. Paul says:

    This Senate Enquiry is a complete waste of time and money. Nothing will come of it.

  5. John Foster says:

    Excellent submission. Let us see how the executive bureaucrats and our people’s representatives respond.

    Please keep up the good work John Foster


  6. Rob Guy says:

    Talk about locking the stable door after the horse has bolted! The opportunity to force electricity suppliers to continuously detect and correct safety issues concerning domestic smart meters passed on day the Order-in-Council bypassed parliament and promulgated a legal instrument to “mandate” public acceptance- Too late by far! I suspect the dead hand of Sir Humphrey Appleby in this new enquiry.

    • Anonymous says:

      Hi Rob,
      Spot on there. The trouble with many people here in Victoria is, that they don’t look in the good old Oxford Dictionary to see what the difference is between a Mandate and the Law. A great difference indeed. A Mandate is only and Instruction just like the Imperative. Go, come stop, sit, jump etc. so it is not The LAW. A Law has to be passed in this case by both Hoses of Parliament and by the Governor General of Victoria.

      This Mandate the Victorian Government used to wickedly try to use to force the Victorian Electricity Customer to all be so weak and stupid as to allow these IDIOT and far from Smart Electric Microwave A.M.I broadcasting and receiving machines on their home and small business properties was a total failure to those of us who understand The LAW.

      In what is technically a DEMOCRACY such as ours in Victoria no Government can force us to simply give up our Safe and Passive Electric Analog Meters. These past two Victorian Governments have Colluded with the five Electric Power Companies four of which are owned by Private Foreign owned Companies two from China and three from Singapore, only United Energy is Australian owned. These two past Victorian Governments have been toadying to, or as Aussies would more accurately put it “SUCKING UP TO THESE Leeches of foreign owned Electric Power Companies who have been stealing more and more money out of our already Cash Strapped Pockets.

  7. eremophila says:

    Reblogged this on Eremophila's Musings and commented:
    Spreading the message.

  8. Rik says:

    Whats the bet they got paid so it will be all false like all the rest of the tests and enquiries before it.
    Even if it turns out bad the government wont do a thing to remove the currently installed smart meters.
    And why would any electricity company lower their prices? They aren’t owned by anyone in this country so what do they care if its costing too much? They get their money and it’ll be a hell of a lot more than any fines they will get for ripping us off. And as they are in a different country they dont care for our laws as they dont live by them.

    In the end its just another waste of money and time.

  9. Gwen says:

    Number 18 Public Interest Advocacy Centre
    The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) is an independent, non-profit law and policy
    organisation that works for a fair, just and democratic society, empowering citizens, consumers
    and communities by taking strategic action on public interest issues.
    PIAC identifies public interest issues and, where possible and appropriate, works co-operatively
    with other organisations to advocate for individuals and groups affected. PIAC seeks to:
    • expose and redress unjust or unsafe practices, deficient laws or policies;
    • promote accountable, transparent and responsive government;
    • encourage, influence and inform public debate on issues affecting legal and democratic
    • promote the development of law that reflects the public interest;
    • develop and assist community organisations with a public interest focus to pursue the
    interests of the communities they represent;
    • develop models to respond to unmet legal need; and
    • maintain an effective and sustainable organisation.
    This centre was set up in NSW. Does anyone know if Victoria has one? It does sound like this one acts on behalf of all Australians not just NSW. Within their submission they say they encourage participation by consumers to present their concerns. Has anyone contacted this Centre and if so, what was the outcome?

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s