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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 223 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

That community-based body approved this tender. The community-based body that we all supported said, "This tender from the Canberra Raiders is the best tender". Mr Speaker, I believe that we owe it to the community to support that process, and I intend to do so as Minister.

MR BERRY: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. If the Gungahlin Development Authority did not receive advice in respect of the viability of the oval, how did they identify that an enclosed oval was not viable?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, let me say again that the naivety of that question, or perhaps the mock naivety of that question, is just astounding. First of all, I believe that the authority did receive advice; they received legal advice during the process. However, I do not know the details of that because I am not a part of that process. That is a decision which the Gungahlin Development Authority had within their purview and which they, therefore, are responsible for. They had legal advice, I understand, about the nature of the two tenders submitted. I understand that this community-based body, on the basis of the legal advice they received, accepted the two tenders as live tenders in the process; notwithstanding that neither, in a sense, complied with the tender documents as initially sought. That advice came from the Government Solicitor's Office, presumably; they might have got it independently, but I assume it came from the Government Solicitor's Office. If they have that advice, why should I intervene to overturn that decision?

Ms McRae: You are still not answering the question.

MR HUMPHRIES: The question is why - - -

Mr Whitecross: You are slipping and sliding.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Berry asked a supplementary question. He deserves an answer without help from his colleagues.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I have indicated already that it is not open to me as Minister to step in and say, "I will do this in a different way; I will get a different result, a different outcome from you". That is not the process, and you should know that, Mr Berry. The tender was appropriately accepted. If the board decided that there was not any point in proceeding to ask for further tenders, they were within their rights to do so; and no member of this place should attempt to stop them from doing it.

MR SPEAKER: Are you listening to this response to your supplementary question, Mr Berry?

Mr Berry: He is not answering the question; there is not much point.

MR SPEAKER: In that case, sit down, Mr Humphries, and conserve yourself.

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