Page 5007 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: Do you mind if I take off the contact number, the contact name?
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: No-one has a problem with that? Okay, take it off.
MR COLLAERY (12.27 am): Mr Deputy Speaker, I made four points which, in another forum, would be regarded as argued and presented. Here Mr Berry called them mud slinging and his Chief Minister added "infamous". That is the standard of the Labor Party. We want a reasoned debate on it. I made some forceful points and, in the Labor Party's hands, they are mud slinging.
I made four points. The first point was that the Labor Party always had the hospitals update redevelopment and they would have known that the date in May, alluded to in that document, meant that the contract was about to be let for D and T block design - not construction, design. They knew that. In that same document - this is the second point I made - there was a significant milestone list or development schedule, and that showed a far from irrecoverable situation.
The third point I made was that a Gazette was issued on 26 June letting some design contracts, which totalled, on a glance, a sum of about $1m in small packages. That was for the D and T block. The overall cost of the D and T block was many millions of dollars. Mr Berry did not answer one single point I raised. He did say that he had had, from a non-government source, the development schedule.
Mr Berry: No, I did not. I said "the master development control plan".
MR COLLAERY: The master development control plan. In other words, not one of the specific questions I raised has been answered in this house. We are paid to be here as politicians, whatever the hour. I asked four fairly precise questions. I got no answers, just some abuse.
The Rally is entitled to an explanation because significant numbers of people, especially this coming weekend, will be down at the Acton Peninsula, as Mr Berry well knows. A lot of Canberra people will be there and there will be a wake. In the document Mr Berry has tabled, which I would like to have access to, if I may, he has alleged what the cancellation costs of the hospital redevelopment project would be. I believe that he said $17m.
Mr Berry: No, $7.12m.
MR COLLAERY: A figure of millions. "But what does that mean?", I ask members of the house. Is he referring to all the works? Is he referring, for example, to the design contracts let on 26 June for those small packages? They do not total a million. On any legal basis there could not have been an extensive compensation claim for the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .