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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (27 November) . . Page.. 4799 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

By bringing them back in we will be putting in doubt whether the true cost of a group such as ACT Roads winning tenders in the ACT is taken into account and we are not undermining companies in the private sector that do not have that advantage. It will be interesting to see whether the Treasury can guarantee that. I note that Ms Dundas raised the whole commercial-in-confidence issue as well. How do the two shareholders who are now sitting here in the chamber guarantee that the new roads unit inside Urban Services will not have an advantage, to the disadvantage of private sector companies? How will they personally guarantee that there will be fairness? Those questions also need to be answered.

On the basis that we still do not know how much the transfer will cost, how neutrality will be guaranteed and whether it is right to do it in the first place, on the basis of a philosophical position that these services are ones that truly can be provided by the private sector, and on the basis of the warning note that I have sounded in my speech, the opposition will be voting against the transfer.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (11.29), in reply: Mr Speaker, may I thank first of all Ms Tucker for being the one person who recognised just how much work was involved in this transfer and just how much work is involved for the officers that are now involved in it. Let me say that the major cost is the blood and sweat of those people that have to unravel this particular exercise.

I am amazed really at Mr Smyth's speech, I've got to say. This was one of the great stuff-ups-one of many, but one of the bigger ones-of the Liberal government. Whether it was CanDeliver, Bruce Stadium or the spin-off of Williamsdale quarry, Totalcare as a whole was a disaster. I would have thought that any self-respecting Leader of the Opposition would have kept his gob shut today, would have been shamefaced that we have come to this situation. As I said in my opening speech, I will leave out some of the history, history that Mr Cornwell recognised and acknowledged. Mr Smyth talked about costs. There were accumulated losses of $21 million-his party's handiwork. Mr Smyth came in here and sniped about the administrative costs of winding up. Yes, it will cost money, and that cost is also down to his party because it set up something that was doomed to fail.

We now have Mr Cornwell showing abiding interest in great detail. If your party had shown that level of abiding interest in Totalcare over time, you would have done something or should have done something about it a whole lot sooner. I want to recognise the administrators, who have worked very hard. I want to thank the staff of Totalcare, who have been tolerant as we have unravelled this process, this disaster of your making. It has been a rather thankless job.

I thank the management of Totalcare for their forbearance as well and for their acceptance that they knew exactly what needed to be done. This is not something that we have done on some philosophical bent. It has been done of necessity as Totalcare was haemorrhaging taxpayers' money because of just one of the many disastrous decisions made by your lot.

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