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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (10 May) . . Page.. 1407 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Mr Speaker, these issues are important. We need to understand what was happening in relation to the Ultimate Rock Concert. We need to understand the relationship between the Stadiums Authority and the event. We need to understand exactly how much and to what extent taxpayers' funds were committed and in what ways. That is the purpose of this request. One of our most important roles is to scrutinise the expenditure of public funds and to make sure that those funds are expended appropriately. We want to see where they went and whom they went to. We want to see how it all worked.

In the debate earlier this evening Mr Kaine said that he sees no reason for the government to provide the statement of claim and supporting documentation for the insurance claim for the cancelled concert. I foreshadow now that I will be moving an amendment, which I understand members have in front of them, to omit paragraph (iv) of Mr Stanhope's motion to reflect Mr Kaine's concerns. The Labor Party have discussed this, and we feel that Mr Kaine's request is a reasonable one and we are prepared to accommodate it.

The other three points are still of central importance and interest to us. We want to make sure that we understand and see all of the documents relating to the budget for the event, including expected revenue, expenses and profits, the reconciliation statement and the insurance policies and other papers. The reason for this is that we are not some third party associated with any of these issues. We are directly involved. We are not some innocent third party, as the Attorney and other have attempted to portray us. We are a central player, and taxpayers' funds have been committed to this event.

We have to make sure we understand what has occurred in relation to this matter. We need to understand that the budget has operated appropriately and that taxpayers' funds have not been misspent. We need to understand how the statement of expenses versus revenue works, we need to see that in that contract between Bruce Operations Pty Ltd and the National Touring Co, and we need to see the insurance policies and all papers relating to those policies.

Much has been made of the insurance policy issue this evening. However, I do not believe members have read the motion closely enough. Mr Stanhope has been quite deliberate in stating "the insurance policies and/or papers relating to those policies". We do not want to unnecessarily divulge or to have divulged details which are legitimately commercial-in-confidence, but where public moneys have been spent, how they have been spent and to whom they have been paid are legitimate matters of public interest. They deserve to be revealed, and the government should be required to provide that information to this place. The government has a responsibility to appropriately expend those moneys in a responsible way, and we have a responsibility to make sure they have been spent in a responsible way. We cannot do that unless these documents are provided.

In conclusion, I reiterate to members that I have circulated an amendment to omit paragraph (iv) from the motion in recognition of the concerns raised by members today. We believe that the documents outlined in the other three paragraphs of the motion are important and deserve to be placed on the public record so we can see exactly whether or not public moneys have been spent in an appropriate manner.

Mr Speaker, I move the following amendment:

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