Page 114 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 14 February 2012

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


I have certainly been consistent in my position on this. Indeed, Ms Le Couteur from the Greens has been consistent in her position on this, as have others. The government got this process wrong from the start. You only need to look at two reports that have looked at this, the first being, of course, the public accounts committee report that said the process here is poor. The public accounts committee actually took the interesting step of issuing an interim report when it came to the great big government office building.

We had a report, audit report No 6 of 2009 on government office accommodation, before the committee. That highlighted a number of fiascos in the delivery of government accommodation, particularly Mr Corbell’s fiasco in the delivery of the new ESA headquarters. I think the airport has done a great job of delivering what they were asked to deliver. The unfortunate thing is that the minister got it wrong and the department got it so wrong that we did not get what we actually ordered.

I compliment the airport on what they have delivered, but what we have got is not what we should have received. It cost a great deal more than it should have and I do not believe it has the capacity in the future. Of course, we had a number of fiascos: the flooding of the centre, even though the government had been warned that it was on a flood plain. Indeed, they had to change the glass because they got the glass wrong.

The committee had a report in front of it, report No 6 of 2009 on the government office accommodation, from the Auditor-General. Recommendation 1 of the committee stated:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government make no final decision with regard to the whole-of-government office building project until the Standing Committee on Public Accounts has received a copy of the business case, and the economic and environmental analysis, together with any other relevant considerations, and had time to consider the information and report to the ACT Legislative Assembly.

The public accounts committee never received any of that. It received none of that. Recommendation 2 stated:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government provide the Standing Committee on Public Accounts with an assessment of the opportunity costs of a whole-of-government office building project against other significant infrastructure projects, such as Majura Parkway, a light rail network, a new convention centre, or a third major hospital.

But the government did not do that either. The third recommendation was:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government whole-of-government office accommodation strategy should be finalised, and considered by the ACT Legislative Assembly, prior to any final decision, or awarding of any contract, with regard to the whole-of-government office building project.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video