Page 2317 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
more than happy to keep the Assembly up to date in relation to those discussions, those negotiations, as this particular issue develops.
MR SPEAKER: Ms Le Couteur, a supplementary question?
MS LE COUTEUR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In addition, will the government be revisiting its negotiations with Revolve, who previously ran the facility at Mugga Lane?
MR STANHOPE: I am not sure that it is in the government’s anticipation at this stage that it will open up specific negotiations with Revolve. The previous position or attitude adopted by the government in relation to recycling or waste recovery at Mitchell and at Mugga was to go to the market. We believe that to be appropriate in relation to the provision of this particular service and I would not anticipate that, as a result of the issues that we now face in relation to Aussie Junk, we would deviate in the future in the event that we do need to retender or renegotiate—that we would do that on a single, select basis.
The government, of course, is aware of the previous role which Revolve played. We went through a process which involved Thiess, and ultimately Aussie Junk was successful in a public tender process. That now, with the benefit of hindsight, has raised some issues which perhaps were not anticipated at the time, but going forward I would not anticipate why we would—and I cannot understand why we would—enter into single, select negotiations with a particular potential provider.
Hospitals—Calvary Public Hospital
MR HANSON: My question is to the Minister for Health. Minister, has analysis been conducted to demonstrate that the purchase of Calvary hospital is in the interest of Canberra’s public health, and if not, why not? If so, will you table the analysis?
MS GALLAGHER: There have been a number of reports done into the government’s arrangements for Calvary Health Care and a number of submissions that the government has considered over a number of years. There is a question on notice about this from the estimates committee.
Mr Smyth: There is, an answer.
MS GALLAGHER: I have signed it off this morning, I think—and there are a number of documents which at the moment are commercial-in-confidence. As you can probably imagine, considering we are in negotiations with the current owner-operator of Little Company of Mary you would not be surprised that a number of the documents that government is currently considering cannot be released for public consumption at this point in time.
MR SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Hanson?
MR HANSON: What analysis has the ACT government conducted to provide evidence that this is in the best interest of the ACT public over the longer term?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .