Page 339 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The report was presented on 1 May 2007. I understand that the government response was provided direct to the committee and has not, up until this stage, been tabled in the Assembly, so I do so now.
I move:
That the Assembly takes note of the paper.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Capital works projects—management
Discussion of matter of public importance
MR SPEAKER: I have received letters from Mr Coe, Mr Doszpot, Mrs Dunne, Mr Hanson, Mr Hargreaves, Ms Hunter, Ms Le Couteur, Ms Porter, Mr Seselja and Mr Smyth proposing that matters of public importance be submitted to the Assembly. In accordance with standing order 79, I have determined that the matter proposed by Mr Hanson be submitted to the Assembly, namely:
Management of major capital works projects.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (3.22): Mr Speaker, thank you. I assume that this is a reward for my outstanding behaviour during question time today. As hard as it was to restrain myself at times, Mr Speaker, I think I only interjected three times.
MR SPEAKER: I think the graduates were surprised by the conduct of the proceedings.
MR HANSON: Yes, I was sorry to disappoint them. They probably came expecting more of a show. Anyway, I am sure I will not disappoint again.
Mr Speaker, this is an important matter that we talk about today in the chamber—that is, this government’s record on delivering capital works. Whilst we see that this government is quick to close schools and quick to close libraries, when it actually comes to the important job of managing and delivering on public works, it has a very poor track record. I will go through a series of examples to illustrate my point.
Before I do, I will just read from a document that outlines the government’s failure in actually delivering capital works. When you look at the rollover in expenditure on capital works in the territory—and I can date it back to when the government first came in, 2001-02—the amounts are significant. They range in that year from $165 million to 2008-09 at $531 million. Rather than go through the details of the dollar amounts, I will tell you about the percentages. Of what was promised as compared to what was delivered, the underspends starting in 2001-02 and then coming forward to 2008-09 were 33 per cent, 37 per cent, 36 per cent, 48 per cent, 48 per cent, 38 per cent, 36 per cent and 44 per cent. So what you see is a declining rate of this government’s ability to actually deliver projects ranging from between a third of capital projects that were not delivered to close to a half. It is a disappointing
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video