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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4452 ..

MR WHITECROSS: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Chief Minister, am I to understand from your answer that this contract for desktop PCs and associated software which you awarded to GE actually requires GE to provide only 10 per cent of the desktop PCs and associated software and that 90 per cent of the desktop PCs and associated software provided under the GE contract are actually provided by local firms? Is that what you are saying? Are you also saying that 90 per cent of the services provided under the mid-range deal with Fujitsu are actually being provided by local companies? Are you also saying that 90 per cent of the communications network under the Telstra contract is being provided by local companies? Or is it not true that many of the local companies you were referring to are, in fact, multinational companies like Fujitsu who have been attracted to Canberra by the glut of Commonwealth and ACT government outsourcing, and the truly local companies are yet to receive the full benefit of the outsourcing which your Government is claiming?

MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, it is always unfortunate when members feel a need to read a supplementary question that is obviously wrong, if you listened to the first half of my answer. It does show a lack of capacity to listen and comprehend. What I said in answer to the first question was that, as Mr Whitecross would know from that speech I gave on Monday, when I was speaking about 90 per cent of the services and hardware being provided by local companies, I was talking about the desktop and applications tender, which is the one we have funded the education improvements out of. That is the tender we are talking about here; and, yes, it is my advice that 90 per cent of the services and so on will be provided by local companies. The companies whose names I have just read out - companies like Wizard, Aspect, CES, Aulich and Co. and so on - are not multinationals; they are local companies.

If Mr Whitecross does not believe that local companies are really picking up some of the Federal Government outsourcing, he should actually go and speak to companies like Select - local IT providers who have significantly improved their outcomes. The local companies that are part of this tender are providing 90 per cent of these services that will be required for this tender.

Mr Whitecross: They are not goods now - a quick change.

MRS CARNELL: No; remember that we lease all of our hardware. They are on leases, so that is a big difference. Just because a company has its corporate headquarters elsewhere does not mean that the actual hands-on work goes elsewhere. I believe really strongly that the approach that has been taken by the ACT and by InTACT should be a model for the rest of Australia because it shows that strategic partnering can work and can ensure that business stays local; that we can make sure that local businesses get a fair share of the business and, at the same time, get a significantly better outcome for government. That surely has to be, I suppose, the best possible outcome for any Government approach in this area.

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