Page 1995 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In investigating these matters I am sure that any consequent issues, should they arise, will also be considered by the inquiry.
If you wish to clarify any of these issues please feel free to contact me.
Professor Pearce did address these matters briefly in his report and said:
ACTTAB responded to this suggestion by indicating there was spare capacity on its present computer and that the new systems it would have to adopt were more than adequately covered by the charge being made to VITAB. ACTTAB said that replacement of equipment was a matter that it had in hand but that the process would have been undertaken regardless of the entry into the VITAB contract. Indeed the VITAB contract provided extra funds to enable the updating program to take place.
Professor Pearce concludes this section of the report with a discussion about outcomes and the merits of the contract in which six points were made. I think that the Chief Minister has adequately addressed those in her remarks. I will merely draw them to members' attention. They are listed at paragraph 177 of Professor Pearce's report.
Madam Speaker, Professor Pearce's report deals effectively with the issues that I identified in my speech to the Assembly on 12 April and on which I believed further clarification was needed to establish exactly what occurred. These issues included whether ACTTAB was in competition with other Australian TABs for the ACTTAB-VITAB contract, the bona fides of the directors and shareholders of VITAB, and the question of inducements and whether they would be more or less available under the provisions of the ACTTAB-VITAB contract.
I would now like to turn to consideration of the ACTTAB-VicTAB contract, noting that many of the documents and papers made available to Professor Pearce will not be made available to the Chief Minister, to members of this Assembly, or to the public. However, it is significant to note Professor Pearce's comments in relation to the matter. The first comment that he makes that I would like to draw attention to is paragraph 182, which says:
It is noteworthy in relation to further developments to point to the request in the letter of 12 August for VicTAB to provide "urgent written agreement" as to the effect of the ACTTAB-VITAB contract.
Further, at paragraph 184:
Mr Neck did not appear to focus his attention on the fact that the contract between ACTTAB and VicTAB as it stood allowed either party to determine the link between the two pools on 6 months notice.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .