Prohibition on the Sale of Sydney Water and Hunter Water
Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023
Legislative Assembly
Legislative Council
Assent
Introduced by: The Hon Chris Minns MP (ALP) — Premier; The Hon Penny Sharpe MLC (ALP)
Links to official parliament websites
Effects of this bill
If this bill passes, it means that:
The Debate
What different members said when this bill was debated:
Sarah Mitchell NAT
“As I was saying earlier, regrettably the current version of the bill discriminates against the 1.85 million people who rely on water utilities other than Sydney Water and Hunter Water. Moreover, by omitting other utilities from its scope, it raises concern about the future privatisation of WaterNSW and the 89 local water utilities serving regional, rural and remote areas of the State.”
Mark Buttigieg ALP
“I feel compelled to participate in debate on the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023, having been such a long-time campaigner against privatisation. Firstly, I congratulate my colleague the Minister for Water for bringing this important election promise to the Parliament, delivering on a key election promise of putting a nail in the coffin of privatisation.”
Cate Faehrmann GRN
“On behalf of The Greens, I speak in support of the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023. The bill amends the Constitution Act 1902 to ensure the continued public ownership of the Sydney Water Corporation and the Hunter Water Corporation, along with their primary undertakings. The Greens have always advocated for the public ownership of essential services.”
Mark Latham IND
“Listening to Ms Cate Faehrmann, one can only wonder if Labor’s record on privatisation is too dreadful. Why did the new leader of The Greens Ms Abigail Boyd announce a Labor-Greens coalition as governing in New South Wales. It was maybe to the surprise of the Labor Party.”
Scott Farlow LIB
“The Hon. Mark Latham is very right that the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023 is a political stunt. The bill was announced in the last week of the election campaign when the Government, then in opposition, was scrounging around, obviously with a bit of polling under its belt, trying to look for something to get a bit of media. The Hon.”
Wes Fang NAT
“I contribute to debate on the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023. I begin somewhere I was not expecting to begin when this debate started: agreeing with Ms Cate Faehrmann on some stuff, which concerns me greatly.”
Chris Rath LIB
“I support the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023, although I call into substantial doubt its necessity. It was the week of the election when Chris Minns broadcast his intention to enshrine government ownership of Sydney Water into the New South Wales Constitution.”
Rose Jackson ALP
“I thank all members who contributed to debate on the Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023. I address some of the issues that were raised, but not all of them. I understand that we will move to the Committee stage next, so I will save some of my remarks for my contribution to that debate.”
News articles and press releases
Constitution Amendment (Sydney Water and Hunter Water) Bill 2023
Mr CHRIS MINNS, Premier — 2023-05-10
Under the proposed changes, such a privatisation attempt would be blocked. Privatisation of Sydney Water and Hunter Water could not occur by stealth. It could only happen under the full glare of public awareness and after scrutiny by this Parliament or, if there is an attempt to bypass the Parliament, in the courts. In the Parliament, any disposal of a water corporation or one of its main undertakings could only happen with the explicit support of a majority of elected members of both Houses. The bill amends the Constitution Act 1902 by inserting a new part 10 dealing specifically with continuing public ownership of Sydney Water and Hunter Water. Under new section 57 (1), neither the corporations themselves, nor a main undertaking of the corporation or any subsidiary, can be sold—or otherwise disposed of—without a new Act of Parliament to approve that.