Page 1440 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 28 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
implications of all options. We are talking about all options and we are talking about the option that the government is pursuing at this time. It has been confusing. It has been confusing because we had Denise Bradley talk about three options, and one of those was merger. We had the government, through its public service group, go away and do a lot of work on that. Then, around December, things suddenly changed. It appears that it would have been in relation to the structural adjustment funding. And suddenly we were talking about yet another model. This new model—this collaborative way forward, this collaborative venture, which we do not have detail of—seems to be the latest that we are looking at.
I take on board Mr Barr’s comments that it is a fast-changing environment, with the Prime Minister making the announcement on 19 March about further dollars. But what Mr Doszpot is clearly trying to get at here is that he does want to see that the economic case stacks up. He wants to see that that work has been undertaken to ensure that both institutions are clear about what financial implications they may be facing and also that the ACT government has clearly looked at what sort of impact it may be having on the ACT budget.
We will be supporting Mr Doszpot’s amendment.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development and Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation) (3.48): I would like to clarify this understanding. Mr Doszpot might confirm it, or not, in his contribution; he has not yet spoken on his amendment. I take “all options” to mean (1) no change, which was one of Bradley’s options; (2) CIT autonomy; (3) a full merger; (4) UCIT. Is a fifth option UC polytechnic? Again, I just want to be clear exactly what the Assembly is requiring of the government. I do not want officials doing unnecessary work; they do have other things to do as well in this time.
Can we take it that at least those four are what you are looking for, and then the impact on both institutions and the ACT government of each of those? I am getting some nods of agreement from across the chamber. Yes? Okay. If Mr Doszpot can verbally confirm that in his contribution, that would be very helpful for the government.
MR DOSZPOT (Brindabella) (3.49), by leave: Mr Barr, we are not trying to play games here; we are simply trying to get the answers—the financial answers that we have been asking for for over seven months. I do not think there is anything ambiguous about what we are asking for. We have been asking for this for seven long months. What we are getting to now is this. We want the four options that you have outlined to be included, as in the financial implications for both institutions and also for the ACT government. If there is a fifth implication that you are referring to, it would be useful to have some idea of what it is you are referring to there, but certainly the four are the ones that we are looking for information on.
Basically it is information we have been asking for for a long time. We would not have had to get to this point had the information been provided to us in the first place.
Mr Barr: You have an amendment that says “all options”. That is so open.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video