Page 714 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 20 March 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Land—Dickson purchase
MS LAWDER: My question is to the Chief Minister and Minister for Economic Development. Chief Minister, why did the director-general of economic development agree to major concessions in the RFT for the Tradies building?
MR BARR: That is a question you would need to direct to the former director-general.
MS LAWDER: Chief Minister, were you or your office advised of the concerns of the ACT Government Solicitor before the deal with the Tradies club was concluded?
MR BARR: I do not believe so, no.
MR COE: Chief Minister, why is there apparently no documentary evidence of how the risk of non-compliance with the Planning and Development Act was reviewed by the D-G and mitigated by the directorate of which you were the responsible minister?
MR BARR: That is a matter that is subject to some consideration and investigation within the directorate concerned.
Health—contraception
MS LE COUTEUR: My question is to the minister for health and relates to access to contraception. Minister, for how long do people typically have to wait to access long-term reversible contraception in the public health system?
MS FITZHARRIS: I thank Ms Le Couteur for the question. I will take it on notice.
MS LE COUTEUR: I fear that this will also be on notice then: how long and at what cost in the private health system?
MS FITZHARRIS: I could not comment on that. That would be a matter for the private health system.
Land—Dickson purchase
MRS JONES: My question is to the Chief Minister and Minister for Economic Development, and it is in relation to the Dickson land swap. Minister, the Auditor-General found that:
The Economic Development Directorate did not achieve an open, transparent and contestable sale process for Block 30 Section 34 because of weaknesses in how it managed the tender process.
Specifically, the land swap transaction endorsed by the former Director‐General is materially at odds with the RFT, the terms and sale process approved by government, and was achieved through a process that lacked probity and transparency.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video