Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 10 Hansard (14 October) . . Page.. 3149 ..
MR CORBELL: I thank the Treasurer. My supplementary question is this: Can the Treasurer explain to the Assembly, or outline to the Assembly, when the roll-out of TransAct is likely to begin, and in which areas of Canberra? If a decision has not yet been made on these two, when will a decision be made?
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I understand that ACTEW is currently proceeding with plans to roll out TransAct. The potential investors, consisting of six institutional investors, have confirmed their continuing interest in the TransAct project, and have confirmed an investment range which adequately covers the funding requirement for the commercial employment of the TransAct network. As I said, there is work going on at the moment to examine those plans. As part of their due diligence program, the investors, acting as a group, have commissioned a firm to undertake a technical review of the project, and this should be completed about now. The information memorandum for investors was circulated to potential investors on 27 September.
The Government has agreed in principle to the project proceeding. However, of course, final approval will not be given until shareholders are in place and final agreement and contracts have been completed and analysed. Final government approval and shareholders approval should be sought within the next two weeks. This is the advice I had as of a few days ago. The financial close is scheduled for the end of October.
MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, I address my question to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, I asked you yesterday in question time about the constitution of the board of Bruce Operations Pty Ltd and you indicated that, although one of the directors has in fact or at least ostensibly been living in Sydney for some time, that person continues to be a director of BOPL. So we have a company registered in Victoria, with two directors, one of whom lives in Sydney, which is rather odd. I wonder how the company can continue to operate effectively. I will quote from the articles of association of the company on a particular matter. The articles state that the remuneration of directors shall be determined from time to time by the company, in general meeting. The directors may also be paid all travelling, hotel and other expenses properly incurred by them in attending and returning from meetings of directors or of a committee of directors of general meetings of the company, or in connection with the business of the company. In other words, they are pretty wide provisions for the reimbursement of travel costs associated with this company. Given that the secondment of the officer concerned to Sydney is somewhat of a Clayton's secondment in that she is still being paid living expenses from the ACT payroll, can the Chief Minister tell us what directors benefits or other benefits under that definition, if any, have been paid to this director for travelling to and from Sydney to attend business of Bruce Operations Pty Ltd?
MS CARNELL
: I think in the end Mr Kaine got it right. Obviously the public servants who serve on our boards are not paid any basic remuneration whatsoever, Mr Speaker. I will certainly have a look to see whether any expenses have been paid to either director. I have to say that Mr Kaine's comment that somehow it is unusual to have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .