Page 4933 - Week 13 - Thursday, 12 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
undertake that comprehensive assessment that I think the community wants, and it is certainly an assessment that the Greens want. It is not some half-hearted look at numbers. We want somebody with the real expertise to sit down and go through the minutiae of the very extensive documents that cover the costings.
The Greens are pleased that the commissioner will get the opportunity to explore in detail how and why the costs of the Cotter project were put together. I think that in fact Mr Seselja would be pleased to see that many of the issues that he raises in his terms of reference for a select committee are actually captured in the terms of reference to the ICRC. But he will not actually know that, because when the minister read out just a few minutes ago the terms of reference that are going to be sent to the ICRC, he was so busy having an chat with his colleagues that I suspect he could not actually stand up and tell the Assembly now what any of those terms of reference are. He was not bothering to listen.
Just to make it clear for Mr Seselja now that he is actually listening, many of the proposed terms of reference that he has raised for his proposed select committee on the Cotter Dam cost blow-out are contained in the terms of reference that are being sent to the ICRC. I actually want to give Mr Seselja credit for that, because he does identify some of the key issues. I am pleased to see that they will be taken up by the ICRC and given the examination and the scrutiny that are warranted. The key point here with which the Greens agree with Mr Seselja is that there are real concerns around this project. I agree with the concerns of the Liberal Party; there are real questions to be answered.
The kerfuffle that is taking place in this place this morning is simply around the process and what is the best way to find that information. I am happy to stand up here today and say the Greens believe that we have identified, in seeking the referral to the ICRC, a highly effective way to work through this. We believe the ICRC is best placed to address these particular issues. That is for a number of reasons, some of which I have stated already, but I would like to identify some others.
The ICRC will have full, unfettered access to all the documents that contain costs and other commercial-in-confidence information, because they are the powers that the ICRC have under their legislation and under the practices they go through. What this highlights is that the ICRC have had access to those documents before, and they will have access to those documents again in the future. They have an understanding of those documents and how they work.
It was interesting that when we spoke to Actew last week and we asked them whether they would provide those documents to the Assembly—the Assembly has the power to call for them—Mr Sullivan made it clear that he will not hand over those documents to the parliament without a fight and that he will seek to block that. I think that is a shame, but I think that highlights the fact that the ICRC is a good pathway to go down, because they will be able to touch on the questions of whether there are efficiencies to be made, whether the process for determining the costs was appropriate, what variations there may be and how the alliance was constructed. All the issues Mr Corbell has just identified will be the terms of reference for the investigation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video