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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (29 June) . . Page.. 2277 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

how inadequate the targets are. In fact, it is acknowledged at the beginning of the State of the Territory Report that the targets are inadequate. The report states:

So there is an admission in the State of the Territory Report that the targets were very general. That is exactly the complaint that is coming loud and clear from people in this community. If this government is really serious about being a caring government and looking at issues of equity in our community, their targets have to be able to be tied down. Their targets have to have time lines, their targets have to have quantities, and that is not evident in the documentation that comes from this government, whether it is in their purchase agreement or their budget, which are basically the same anyway.

Targets are meaningless unless they are set in the context of social need and an analysis which shows what we need. These targets are seemingly set according to what happened last year. We are still asking for a comprehensive social analysis of need and equity in this town and we have not got it.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.49): I want to respond briefly to this item and refer to a couple of aspects relating to the operations of Totalcare Industries. I think, in the context of discussing the budget, it is appropriate that we draw attention to the fact that Totalcare is still actively involved in the aftermath of its role and responsibilities in relation to the hospital implosion. I do not have the actual legal costs with me at the moment but we are all aware of the significant cost to the Totalcare organisation of the hospital implosion. We are aware, of course, of the stringent criticisms which Totalcare faced in the coroner's report as a result of what the coroner identified as Totalcare's failings in relation to the contracting, the tendering and the lead-up to that fatal event.

Totalcare has expended some very significant sums of money in the context of the legal ramifications. I have a feeling-and I am sorry that I do not have the figures with me-that Totalcare's expenditures alone amount to some hundreds of thousands of dollars. The interesting thing, and the thing I want to reflect on as we discuss this budget, is that Totalcare's legal costs continue. Members would be aware that Totalcare has indicated that its response to the legal action instituted by the Bender family against the ACT government and Totalcare is to vigorously defend that action.

Totalcare has resolved that it will not negotiate a compensation package with the Bender family, which is its right, of course, but rather will pursue the matter to the point of vigorously defending the action-I use the words "vigorously defend" advisedly because they were the words of the head of Totalcare in evidence to a committee of this place; he felt that it was appropriate for Totalcare to take that attitude. I do not have a comment on that. That is a matter for the organisation and not something on which I would wish to comment other than to say that there are significant continuing cost implications for Totalcare, and as a result of that the ACT ratepayers as the owners of Totalcare, in regard to the implosion. I think it is relevant that we note in the context of this budget that ACT ratepayers will continue to pay significant and continuing costs as a result of the fatal hospital implosion.

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