Page 585 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 11 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
money that is going to be outlaid will be spent wisely, efficiently and in a way that improves the lives of Canberrans?
We want to see infrastructure that improves Canberra. We want to see our roads upgraded. We want to see our schools upgraded. We want to see our basic services taken care of. We want to look down the track at issues like light rail. If you cannot get bridges done, if you cannot build a prison, if you cannot build more than a one-lane road to the fastest growing area of Canberra and get it anywhere near your original budget, what faith can we have that you are going to be able to deliver the kind of city building infrastructure that Canberrans are calling for and that Canberrans need to move forward? We need it to build our economic capacity. We need it for our lifestyle. We need it so that our city can continue to grow in a sustainable way.
We took a plan called “Infrastructure Canberra” to the last election. We have seen elements of that plan copied by the government. They now talk about an infrastructure plan. We welcome that. There does need to be a strategic plan. We have not seen that in the past and we certainly have not seen it delivered. But we do need to see structural changes in terms of the kind of advice going to government, the kind of advice on priorities for them to be able to deliver. We believe that there should be expert advice. We believe that it should be high-level advice that is provided publicly, to the Assembly and, of course, the government, so that government is able to make better decisions on procurement and infrastructure priorities.
We have seen significant problems with procurement in a number of our agencies. We have not heard from the government how they are going to change that. What will they do differently to ensure that these kinds of mistakes, delays and cost blow-outs are not a feature going forward? This is the challenge for the government. We have put forward some ideas, some of which they have adopted. But they—and Katy Gallagher when she speaks—now need to outline the plan to us. Katy Gallagher needs to say how they are going to do things differently. If all it amounts to is moving a public servant from a department to specifically oversee infrastructure, we do not believe that is enough. We do not believe that a coordinator-general, or whatever they are going to be called, is enough. We do not believe that is the kind of structural change that is necessary.
I saw the planning minister walk in. I should not neglect his portfolio—the importance of the planning portfolio and the planning system in the ability to deliver infrastructure. We are still hearing from industry. As recently as yesterday, I had an email from an industry group saying that the problems in the planning system are the greatest risk to the delivery of this infrastructure. Not only is there the issue of this government’s ability to get it done, but the planning system is slowing things down. We saw the head of Actew before our committee, suggesting very clearly to us that the planning system was going to slow the ability of Actew and ActewAGL to get things done in terms of delivering the vital energy needs of the territory. Apart from the rushed announcement that we saw in December from Mr Barr, which was a copy of the Liberals’ policy that was taken to the election, what plans do they have to fix this? What plans do they have to ensure that this infrastructure can be delivered for the good of all Canberrans?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .