- solar RECS scheme (expensive energy, especially if you don't have it) costs passed on
There's a cost there certainly, but it's not particularly large in most states. That said, I do agree that the high rate FIT's were always going to lead to trouble once adoption moved beyond the small scale demonstration stage and we ended up with solar salespeople at shopping centres. In NSW specifically, paying the 60c gross FIT was just silly and was always going to end badly.
- true supply cost previously partially hidden within state bureaucracies
Might have happened somewhere, but in most cases the reverse was true with the power industry either carrying things out on behalf of government, or outright handing over cash. That certainly happened at least in Vic, Tas and SA. Not sure about NSW.
- past under-investment in renewal/maintenance of the supply network
As anyone who has ever worked in a "blue collar" industry where the "economic rationalist" types have taken control will tell you, the first thing they always do is slash maintenance. That's a prelude to either running the whole operation into the ground or selling it off. Same pattern in everything from smelters to utilities - they run it down first, then either close or sell it. Makes the management look good in the short term, at which point such people always move on, but leaves a huge mess for whoever comes next. That applies regardless of whether it's publicly owned or private - just look at the disaster Pacific National left with the railways in Tas as one such example (why the state didn't force the company to pay up I'll never know - dodgy dealings by Labor there I suspect).
- hydro electric expansion shut down
No argument there, although that doesn't explain the cost increases in SA in particular which didn't have any hydro generation to start with.
Wholesale electricity is still cheap, in real terms its' cheaper than it has ever been. It's transmission, distribution and retail soaking up the money not generation. The carbon tax only significantly impacted generation and in any event was limited to 2 years.
- massive population growth in the cities, necessitating unprecedented poles and wires roll out, upgrading and maintenance
I'll have to check the stats, but I'm pretty sure that Adelaide in particular, the place hardest hit by soaring prices, has had a relatively slow rate of population growth for quite some time. That's my understanding at least.
Poles and wires are the most expensive part of electricity supply. The choice for NSW voters later this month, is who can best manage this, while keeping a lid on price increases.
Transmission and distribution costs have gone through the roof, that's my point. Regardless of whether it's privately owned / leased (eg Vic and SA) or publicly owned (eg NSW or Tas) the cost has increased disproportionately. That comes down to the industry structure having fundamental flaws. Whether it's privately owned or public doesn't change that in itself.
If the NSW government, or the opposition, is worried about the cost of electricity in NSW then they need to realise that the problem isn't about ownership of a single part of the industry. The problem is with how it all operates and is regulated, who owns it being a far lesser issue. Simply changing who owns what does not lead to lower prices, unless there is some efficiency gain and/or lower rate of return.
Another question the voters of NSW might sensibly ask themselves is what legal protections exist to ensure that the money raised isn't spent on things of no lasting value? You sell / lease something today, what ensures that this money actually goes into new assets and isn't simply frittered away as seems to be occurring in SA, Vic and federally?