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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (17 February) . . Page.. 282 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

going through any tendering process". In his report Mr Sherman states that, through his assessment of a number of contract files, "in all cases there were acceptable reasons" for single select - that is on page 12 - and therefore the processes used were compliant.

Mr Sherman indicates that, while the ACT government purchasing policy is binding on all government agencies, the guidelines which fall under the policy do not appear to be binding. Mr Sherman indicates that there is some inconsistency in this area. It should be noted that, in order to provide appropriate flexibility, guidelines are not mandatory. Obviously, there needs to be a clear process for ensuring the appropriate reporting and documentation of cases which do not fall within these guidelines. Given Mr Sherman's comments, this is a matter for the coordination committee to resolve. In addition, while I acknowledge that the coordination committee will progress this issue, it seems reasonable to propose that any contracts over $100,000 undertaken on a single select basis be identified in the relevant department's annual report.

Accounting for the use of explosives, the issue dealt with on pages 18 and 19 of the report, is about tracking supply and utilisation of stock. I understand that WorkCover advised Mr Sherman that arrangements had been made to "amend the blast plan requirements so that the post-blast reports will include how much explosive was taken on site, how much was used and how much was taken off". Mr Sherman's assessment of this recommendation will be substantially implemented when the action I have just outlined has been carried out.

The independent statutory authority is dealt with on pages 20 to 22. The Government was disappointed that the Assembly did not choose to pass the legislation that this Government proposed. That legislation would have fully implemented the coroner's recommendation for the establishment of an independent statutory authority. However, of course, the Government is implementing the will of the Assembly. Mr Sherman indicates in his report that this recommendation cannot be implemented until the relevant legislation comes into effect and the new authority is up and running with appropriate resources. Mr Berry chose to move away from the coroner's report and go down a different path. Unfortunately, the Government is unable to implement that recommendation. I understand why Mr Berry is concerned that the report does indicate that the approach he took is not in line with the coroner's recommendation, but we have had that debate already in this place. We made that point at the time, and the Assembly chose to go in a different direction.

Mr Berry: You purchased the report, so you get the answers you want.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Mr Berry has made a very serious accusation. Mr Sherman is the former chairman of the National Crime Authority of Australia. He is a highly respected figure. Mr Berry's clear inference in that comment was that Mr Sherman had been paid to say what he had to say. I think it is a very serious slur, and I ask Mr Berry to withdraw it.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, please. Withdraw, Mr Berry.

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