Page 4629 - Week 12 - Thursday, 15 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In 2006, Actew undertook the Cotter to Googong bulk water transfer project. This infrastructure development was an interim but very effective measure to augment and make optimal use of the ACT’s water storage systems. I will not go over all of the history of the water security projects again, given the time and the amount of time available to me.
I will now turn to the details of the proposed amendment to Mr Rattenbury’s amendment. The government is proposing that we have regard to the documents that Mr Rattenbury is seeking—in particular the independent review of the target outturn costs and other formal costings undertaken by Actew or the Bulk Water Alliance in relation to the expanded Cotter Dam project, the report undertaken by Deloitte’s, which is a detailed independent review of the cost of the expanded Cotter Dam project, and also the geotechnical reports associated with that project.
These documents, I am advised by Actew, can be provided to members in full and the government is committed to doing so. There are two documents that have more commercially sensitive information in them. They contain information which would be of enormous benefit to the competitors of Actew’s partners in the Bulk Water Alliance. All of these companies compete with each other on a regular basis to construct new water facilities in Australia. In particular, there is the impending project at the Traveston Dam in Queensland, a billion dollar project, which these companies will compete for.
The target outturn costs document and the contract signed by Actew and its partners in the Bulk Water Alliance contain significant levels of detail which would reveal the commercial undertakings and the commercial operations of these companies. To release the documents would potentially place them in a position where they would lose their competitive advantage vis-a-vis their competitors and place them in a significantly compromised commercial position.
I am therefore proposing an amendment which will recognise that a number of the documents sought by Mr Rattenbury can be released. A number of other documents can be released in summary—in particular the target outturn cost document and the contract between Actew and its partners in the Bulk Water Alliance. The government will seek further advice, as will Actew, as to whether the target outturn cost document and the contract itself can be released in full. We will report to the Assembly in the first sitting week of November.
These documents, as Mr Sullivan has advised members in a briefing at lunchtime today, present some difficulties in terms of their full release. Actew is committed to providing as much information as possible to the Assembly. But we do need to have regard to the commercially sensitive information that will have a direct impact on parties if they are released to a broader audience. We need to have regard also to the fact that Actew has entered into a contractual obligation in terms of the limited release of that information and the processes for that release.
That is the nature of the amendment that the government is proposing today. The government will have regard to giving a detailed explanation of what its final position is in relation to the release of those documents when it comes to November. We will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .