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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 25 May 2004) . . Page.. 2186 ..

Mr Quinlan: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

See the answer to Question No 1330 above.

Williamsdale Quarry
(Question No 1333)

Mr Smyth asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 4 March 2004:

(1) Further to the reply to a Question without notice of 10 February 2004 and in relation to the sale of the business and assets of the Williamsdale Quarry joint venture, why were the proceeds of the sale of the business applied exclusively to the finance lease debts of the joint venture and Pavement Salvage Holdings;

(2) What is the explanation for the joint venture recording a loss on the disposal of property, plant and equipment of $1.966 million;

(3) Why was the loss on the disposal of property, plant and equipment of $1.966 million a cost to Totalcare;

(4) Why was the write-off of a debt of $1.25 million due to Pavement Salvage Holdings a cost to Totalcare;

(5) Why was Totalcare responsible for funding the negative net assets of the joint venture of $0.3 million;

(6) Why was Totalcare responsible for funding what have been described as any other costs associated with the wind up of the joint venture;

(7) Given that Pioneer Construction Materials Pty Ltd took over and has continued the operations of the Williamsdale Quarry, was any goodwill received for the sale of the business; if so, what was the value of goodwill included in the transaction.

Mr Quinlan: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

See the answer to Question No 1330 above.

Williamsdale Quarry
(Question No 1334)

Mr Smyth asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 4 March 2004:

(1) Further to the reply to a Question without notice of 10 February 2004 and in relation to the decisions leading to the sale of the Williamsdale Quarry joint venture, did Totalcare make a decision, independently from other parties to the joint venture, to sell its share of the joint venture;

(2) Why was Totalcare’s initial decision of an intention to sell its share of the joint venture changed to a decision to sell the entire business and assets of the joint venture;

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