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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 1265 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

worn down by government process. I would like to propose a special thanks to those people for keeping the project alive. Every project has some cynics, but the VHST stands apart with its overwhelming support in the community. When I talk to people they say that the link between Canberra and Sydney is a great idea and simply ask, as I am sure they ask every member of this Assembly, "When is it going to happen? We want to get on. We want to ride". The announcement of Speedrail as the preferred proponent takes us one step closer to the construction of this exciting project. It shows that the ACT Government will support the projects that make a difference, Mr Speaker - the projects that will provide opportunities and employment for the people of Canberra and the region, and this is a significant number of jobs.

The next matter is the evaluation process and key factors in the decision. Mr Speaker, the current evaluation process commenced in April 1997 when the ACT, Commonwealth and New South Wales governments decided to test the market to gauge whether a private sector consortium would be prepared to design, construct, finance and operate a high speed train service between Canberra and Sydney. To oversee the competitive process governments chose a structure that had been used successfully in the previous evaluations. The evaluation structure consisted of a project control group, PCG, with an independent chair and representatives from each government. This group was supported by a project evaluation committee, PEC, with representatives from each government and consulting experts. The governments had previously explored the potential for a fast train service between Canberra and Sydney on several occasions over the past decade. There was an intensive evaluation of options during 1996. Through these processes governments have developed a considerable body of knowledge on the competing technologies and their likely impacts.

The project brief and invitation for detailed submissions for the Sydney-Canberra very high speed train project was sent to proponents in October 1997. The document took several months to develop and provided a thorough framework with which to undertake an analysis of the proposals. The consultants worked with the PCG to develop a framework that would encourage the private sector to submit what they considered to be the most viable and satisfactory option to governments. Relevant agencies in each government were asked to review the draft document to ensure that it was comprehensive. As a result, the invitation provided proponents with a very detailed account of the information that governments required to make an evaluation and also provided additional information that might provide proponents help in developing their submission. The invitation highlighted the key areas and issues for evaluation as: No net cost to taxpayer; financial and economic; risk; design; environmental; technology; land corridor; construction and delivery; operations; maintenance; local industry development plan; and other general criteria. Expert consultants were used to develop the specific sections of the invitation to ensure that the structure of the submissions would draw out the information required by the assessment framework. Evaluation against the criteria could then be undertaken quickly and with certainty. To assist the information-sharing process the consortia were allocated a weekly meeting where issues were raised, questions asked and answered. Proponents were also able to submit a range of options. The process was made as interactive as possible and aimed to achieve the best outcome.

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