Page 1186 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 11 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
On that basis the questions of quality, of cost, of delivery times and of guarantees have all been canvassed and the contracts for various sizes of ACT flags were awarded to three interstate manufacturers. Those manufacturers are Evan Evans in Melbourne, Foxcraft Flags in Brisbane and Dublett Pty Ltd in Sydney. I am advised, Madam Speaker, that no ACT supplier who provided a quotation could match the tenders provided by those interstate tenderers.
Madam Speaker, Mrs Carnell has raised the question of jobs and it is interesting to note that the ACT supplier that I am aware of who has made complaints about this whole process was intending to carry out a significant part of the manufacture overseas. I think that in those circumstances it is rather surprising that the local tenderer was not able to match the interstate tenderers. Nevertheless, I stand by the provisions of the Government Procurement Agreement which do, I think, provide a fair basis for ACT suppliers to tender for ACT work and also for interstate work, and that is a position which clearly Mr Kaine supported. Perhaps in the light of greater experience Mrs Carnell might support it as well.
MRS CARNELL: I have a supplementary question. I would like to point out that the Eagle Hawk Motel is in the Canberra region and it does employ - - -
Mr Connolly: Madam Speaker, I take a point of order. Is this a supplementary question?
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MRS CARNELL: Certainly. How does the Government's action to accept interstate tenderers conform with your election promise made during the 1992 campaign launch, I seem to remember? The promise was:
We will establish an ACT Supply and Tender Agency to ensure -
and I emphasise "ensure" -
that ACT public sector demand for goods and services supports ACT industry.
Was this promise just another hollow election grab?
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, we are establishing the supply and tender agency but in doing so we are concerned to ensure that ACT businesses remain competitive. I can see no reason why the Canberra community should be forced to pay more for government services, government contracts, on a discriminatory basis. Quite clearly, Mr Kaine could not see that point either. I think that Mrs Carnell ought to have a look at what is good business practice and what is value for money. Why should the people of the ACT be asked to pay more than they need to for any government service, any government contract, and why should ACT businesses be left to be less than competitive with their interstate counterparts? I can see no reason for that. As I say, the supply and tender agency is concerned to match better ACT requirements with ACT businesses, but it is certainly not aimed at propping up uncompetitive businesses as Mrs Carnell seems to be proposing.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .