Page 965 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 March 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


MR JENSEN (4.24): Mr Speaker, sometimes I think I must have a lisp, too. When I am referring to Mrs Grassby in this place, sometimes I refer to a well-known female animal that was very popular in the States and a friend of Mickey Mouse; but let us get on with the debate at the moment.

Clearly Mrs Grassby was not listening to my colleague Mr Duby, and could not change her prepared speech, so she had to continue on with - - -

Mrs Grassby: I was listening to him, but he was still wrong.

MR JENSEN: If you were listening, Mrs Grassby, you obviously did not listen very well, for my colleague Mr Duby clearly indicated that the processes identified as necessary after Shelleys closed have been in place and monitoring was, in fact, taking place. However, there were no problems up until that last month. Mrs Grassby's colleague Mr Connolly accepts that the last month will be a problem area for those firms, particularly in the contracting business, that go into liquidation.

There is always going to be a problem in that particular industry because of the nature of the industry, and it is appropriate, I think, to make sure that actions are in place to minimise the damage that may be caused by such problems. I believe that the processes and procedures that have been put in place and are being put in place by Minister Duby, who clearly has taken a hands-on approach to this particular matter, are quite obvious.

In the Hunt Boilers case, Mr Speaker, the project manager did not fail; a contractor working for the project manager failed. It was effectively a head contractor as in the Shelleys case, and the project management system worked well, as my colleague Mr Duby has pointed out. But, Mr Speaker, like my colleague Mr Duby and, I am sure, other members of this house, I am totally amazed that the Opposition is so bereft of ability that it needs to recycle its questions or issues every six months. Recycling is a major plank in the Government's environment policy and maybe the Opposition is seeking to lift its game in this area at last; but I would hope that it would stop recycling the same old issues all the time and start to bring up some new issues a little more often.

As my colleague Mr Duby has stated, the Government has already implemented a number of initiatives to reduce the risk to the Government and to subcontractors. These initiatives, as detailed, covered both administrative and contractual issues. It is apparent to me that the Opposition does not yet understand the nature of and procedures associated with a building and construction industry, and has no real concern for those employed in the industry. That must be the case, because there is no other answer for it, quite frankly. The rolling strikes referred to by Mr Duby are a case in point.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .