Page 1002 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 21 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mrs Dunne’s motion simply says, in very simple terms: what were you budgeting before the rains came? What had you spent? We have been told part of that. We have been told that you had spent $315 million. We wanted to know what had been spent. What was the new budget? We do not believe that the budget had not been revised at that point. We also seek future updates on the cost of this project. That seems inherently reasonable. The minister’s defence there was particularly weak. He said, “Those updates might not be of any use.” They might not be or they might. If the government is forced into a little bit of transparency and accountability on this issue, maybe we can get some answers.
Mrs Dunne’s motion should be supported. We should be saying to the government: give us all the facts. Put all of the facts on the table. Do not hide them again. Do not hide the cost blow-outs as we have seen in the past. It is a completely legitimate and reasonable thing for this Assembly to call for. It is inexplicable, I think, that the motion, as presented by Mrs Dunne, would not actually pass this place. It is a factual motion seeking factual information from a government that has cost taxpayers through its incompetence at least $240 million and we do not know how much more.
It is reminiscent of GDE. It is reminiscent of how this government handles major projects. They cannot handle them. They stuff around. They refuse to do them and then they cannot control costs. It is the taxpayers who end up suffering. It is taxpayers who end up paying as a result. I commend Mrs Dunne’s motion to the Assembly.
I think Mr Barr’s amendment does not get to the heart of the matter, does not actually address all of the numbers. We should be seeking every piece of information this government have because they have shown themselves to be untrustworthy on this project. They have not covered themselves in glory. They have not shown that we can just take at face value what they say because they have got it so wrong on so many occasions when it comes to projects and when it comes particularly to this project on the enlarged Cotter Dam.
The motion should be supported and we should be holding this government rigorously to account for its failures, for its cost blow-outs and for its rank incompetence in delivering major projects such as the enlarged Cotter Dam.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (12.05): I thank Mr Rattenbury for allowing me to speak again in response to Mr Barr’s amendment so that I can move the amendment to Mr Barr’s amendment and therefore allow Mr Rattenbury to address it all at once when everything is on the table.
I move the amendment circulated in my name to Mr Barr’s amendment to my original motion:
Omit subparagraphs (2)(a) and (b), substitute:
“(a) by the close of business on Wednesday, 21 March 2012, the budget estimate as it stood at 1 March 2012 for the total cost of completion of the project to enlarge the Cotter Dam to the point of commissioning into service;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video