Page 2687 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 28 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
a sky bridge across from the first or second floor to the first or second floor here, then we will come down the stairs, really does question the planning that has gone into this building. So, again, there is a recommendation that flies in the face of what one minister has said publicly.
On many occasions there has been a lot of talk about the size of the ministry, and indeed the fact that there are only four ministers at the moment is of concern to a great number of people, as is the quality of some of the ministers. Recommendation 23 says:
The Committee recommends that the Chief Minister provide clarification to the ACT Legislative Assembly on how any growth in the size of the Ministry would be accommodated within the proposed new Government office block.
The problem is the new plans only show five ministers. So if there is any expansion into the future it means the ministerial wing must eat into the public service wing, and if those public servants are displaced to accommodate ministers and the functions of the government you then have to ask the question of where they will go.
This does just bring into the spotlight again the case for this great office building that the government proposes. The government’s response is that the recommendation of the committee is:
Noted.
The proposed Government Office Building has been designed to provide a more efficient approach to accommodating additional functions than would otherwise be the case, this includes the provision for ministerial offices.
The final number of ministerial offices will be determined as part of the preparation of the functional design brief. The design will be flexible to meet the changing future needs and requirements.
But, if you look at the plan, there is not the room for this extra minister, or two or three or four, or however many it may get to. I think most people assume seven is a fairly reasonable number for a jurisdiction of this size. So if you are going to put two more ministers in there you are going to displace a significant number of public servants as ministers have a far larger footprint than your average public servant. We have got the ministerial crisis room, of course, which I think we are all quite amazed to see there.
This does go to the planning, and we know the record of this government on the delivery of infrastructure, and we know they diminish the scope, they blow the budget, or they put back the delivery time. This project already has all the hallmarks of that happening again. I think we need to look at the great big new office building with some concern. I think a skyway would be an extraordinary waste of resources. You really do have to question the merits of the proposed building in any event.
Some other issues that were raised by committee members included the replacement of computers and keyboards, and we noted the considerable disquiet when this matter was raised in the hearings—a number of members mentioned that they had concerns
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video