Page 214 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 11 February 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
A lot of questions remain over the Citywide contract. It has been given to a company that previously undercut local operators and then failed to complete the work as promised for the price at which they tendered. Here we are again, three years down the track, with Citywide being handed a substantial contract to complete mowing in the territory that they won by undercutting local contractors. I do not disrespect anyone in the lawn mowing industry when I say it is a fairly elementary style of work. There is no innovation in technology that will see lawn mowing being done at twice the speed for half the cost. It is a manual task that requires an operator on a machine heading down verges and nature strips through our local suburbs cutting grass. The thought that a Melbourne government-owned entity is able to do this job for half of what a local small business can should certainly be raising substantial questions as to whether this tender is legitimate or whether it is simply there to capture the work and come back to government in a number of months to try to renegotiate the terms of it.
It would be fair to local businesses, local operators and local contractors that have missed out on this body of work that the government take the position—this relies on Mr Rattenbury as the minister—where they take a stand and say under no circumstances will they renegotiate with Citywide should there be a discrepancy in the tender price for the package of work they have taken. That is a fair statement that should come from the government. They should say, “We will take the tender on face value, but we’re not going to be revisiting it at the expense of local operators.”
To add a bit more context to what kind of a business we have contracted, Citywide is owned by the Melbourne City Council. I guess this move could be seen as Mr Rattenbury, the minister for TAMS, saying, “The Melbourne council can do it better than what I can.” It is an interesting thought that the City of Melbourne is more capable of mowing lawns than the ACT and the ACT government. Members should look at the board of Citywide—it is stacked with Labor members. The chairman of the board is none other than former Labor Premier John Brumby. Is it a case of jobs for the boys?
Mr Barr interjecting—
MR WALL: The Chief Minister is laughing. I think it is fair that this is explained. Again, if the due diligence was done effectively, the history of Citywide, particularly in their operations in Melbourne, would have raised some serious questions. A Current Affair did an expose in October or November last year on Citywide, who were procured to do general waste and recycling collection through some of the Melbourne council areas. Instead of sending two trucks down the street to pick up general waste in one and recyclables in the other and sending them to the appropriate destinations, one truck was sent down the street which picked up both general waste and the recycling in the same truck which was taken directly to landfill. This is the history this business has.
Some serious questions are raised around the process of this tender, the due diligence put in to securing this tender and to the consideration that is given more broadly to local businesses in the ACT. We all need to remember that businesses that operate in the ACT region employ local Canberrans. They support other Canberra businesses, and the money and profits these jobs can generate stays here in the local community as opposed to supporting interstate governments.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video