Page 2010 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The construction contract was finalised for the modified scope of works and program in mid-November 2009.
Rather than commence works in December 2009, which is the peak period for traders, the start of works was postponed until January 2010, to take advantage of the quieter holiday period.
(6) The following shopping centres are currently programmed to undergo various levels of upgrade or refurbishment and/or Forward Design: Lyons, Red Hill, Sculling, Waramanga, Farrer in the future.
(7) The current shopping centre upgrade program is $8 million.
Akron—collapse
(Question No 699)
Mr Seselja asked the Minister for Land and Property Services, upon notice, on 18 March 2010:
(1) How many contractors have been affected by the collapse of Akron.
(2) How many tenders for construction or development work have been called for within new suburbs before the relevant development application has been approved in (a) 2007-08, (b) 2008-09 and (c) 2009-10 to date.
(3) What risks did the ACT Government identify with the engagement of Akron when it considered Akron’s bid(s) for contracts.
(4) How many statutory declarations did the ACT Government receive from Akron throughout its contracts relating to the completion of work and payment of contractors.
(5) What did the ACT Government do with these statutory declarations.
(6) When did the ACT first become aware of the financial difficulties faced by Akron and when did the ACT Government first become aware of the difficulties Akron had in paying sub contractors.
(7) What action did the Government take when it became aware of these difficulties.
(8) How much money will the ACT Government lose as a result of the Akron collapse and why will it lose this amount.
(9) Given that the Directors of Akron stated that the company failed due to losses incurred on projects in unfamiliar regions, what experience did Akron have in projects in the ACT and is the Government aware of any projects that Akron incurred a loss on.
(10) Given that the Administrators stated that a contributing factor to the collapse of Akron was that the company outgrew its systems and capabilities, was the ACT Government aware that Akron was growing strongly to the point that it was outgrowing its systems and capabilities when it engaged Akron.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video