Page 4929 - Week 13 - Thursday, 12 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
associated with getting to the final cost for the project, then there are two ways that we can go about this. We can go about this in a considered way, in a way that tries to get to the facts of the matter, or we can try to play politics and score a quick political point about it.
I have to say that the government favours an approach which is constructive rather than simply seeking to score cheap political points on the very important issue of water security for the region. For that reason, the government does not support this referral to the Assembly committee today. The government instead, and I as the responsible minister through my Attorney-General’s portfolio, will later this morning be making formally the referral to the Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission on a review of the costs of this project.
Madam Assistant Speaker, why is the ICRC the most appropriate course of action? The ICRC is an expert independent body established to determine whether or not costs associated with major infrastructure projects are consistent with best practice, that they are prudent and feasible and that they provide value for money to the community, to the taxpayer. I think that is what everyone in Canberra wants to be reassured about—that the cost of this project does represent value for money, that it has been appropriately managed. If it has not been appropriately managed, that can be properly assessed, identified and the reasons for it disclosed.
The establishment of the ICRC referral is, I think, the mechanism that would give us those answers. Those are the answers the Canberra community want. They do not want some nasty political brawl. They want a constructive approach that gets to the bottom of what has occurred, what are the reasons for the difference in costs between previous estimates and the final project costs as announced by Actew earlier this year and what has changed in the meantime to get to that outcome.
The referral that I will be making later this morning will look at the following issues: firstly, whether the projected costs of the enlarged Cotter Dam water security project are prudent and efficient in terms of meeting the water security standards required of Actew—that is, the standards required by the government and the community.
The next issue relates to the approach taken to put in place an alliance arrangement with contractors to secure delivery of the enlarged Cotter Dam water security project to provide water security for the ACT and region. So it is not just whether or not the projected costs are prudent and efficient but also whether or not the approach put in place with Actew’s commercial partners is the most appropriate one. The third issue is the process undertaken to develop and test the costings of the enlarged Cotter Dam water security project at all stages from 2005 to November 2009.
So it is a detailed, independent, arm’s length assessment of whether or not the process undertaken in the establishment of those costs, the testing of those costs, the development of the presumptions underpinning those costs, was appropriate, was prudent, was thorough. That is a very important question which I think all members in this place have been asked.
Fourthly is the potential for any new cost variations to be incurred by Actew under the contractual arrangements put in place for enlarged Cotter Dam water security project
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video