Page 957 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
subcontractor under the project management, sub-subcontracted - if that is the term, and I am sure it is not the term - that is, let the job by way of small contracts. But Hunts did that, not the project managers. And that meant that, if the small contractors concerned rang the project manager, they were told, "Well, that has nothing to do with us; we are not project managing this job in the sense of ourselves letting out the subcontract". And when they rang Hunts they were usually unable to get an answer.
Mr Speaker, that was an issue of real concern, because we had been told by Mr Duby at considerable length, both in this house and at the Estimates Committee, that the project management technique would lead to a more secure environment in the building industry for subcontractors. Sadly, the experience of the Hunt Boilers dispute showed that that is not the case.
Mr Speaker, in summary, the Opposition is not so naive as to suggest that the Government can avoid collapses in the building industry. The Opposition is not so naive as to suggest that these problems occur only in the ACT, because we have seen that similar problems have occurred recently in New South Wales and led to a major problem on the Goulburn bypass. But there are things that the ACT Government can do to reduce the problem. The three proposals that the Opposition is putting forward - and, as I say, putting forward in good faith for the Government's consideration - would go some way towards ensuring that subcontractors and suppliers in this Territory would be more secure and their interests would be better protected. Hopefully, we would see less of the sort of real distress that Mrs Grassby will refer to in her remarks - the distress of small business people in this Territory when a major public works contract collapses.
MR DUBY (Minister for Finance and Urban Services) (4.01): Mr Speaker, frankly I am quite amazed that the Opposition has raised this as a matter of public importance only six months after it previously raised the issue. At that time I gave a comprehensive reply, which should have satisfied Mr Connolly, that the ACT Government can and is competently managing its public works. In my statement at the time, I referred to the Government's purchasing policy which ensures fairness, equality of opportunity, and best value for money for the Government.
Mr Speaker, this policy is available to all private sector organisations or indeed anyone who may be interested in dealing with the Government. I would suggest that perhaps Mr Connolly should get himself a copy of it so that he can understand what the heck he is talking about. I also explained how my Public Works department ensures the quality of its works and the consequent value for taxpayers' money. In that statement I also went into some detail about the failure of R and G Shelley Pty Ltd, which caused the matter of payments to subcontractors to first become an issue in the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .