Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2014 Week 1 Hansard (25 February) . . Page.. 27..
number of issues where this minister is not in control of her portfolio. Of course, there was the retweeting of the message with the c-bomb in it. Again, initially it was denied: it was an accident; she did not know what she was doing; it went off in her handbag. In the end, the truth outed; she had done it. But initially, let us face it, there was denial that she had.
This minister has no idea regarding the implementation of the NDIS. Indeed, the ACT has dropped off as one of the test sites. It has been put back because we have got a minister here who cannot deliver. The closure of the Women's Information and Referral Centre occurred but she could not explain why it was necessary and what was put in place. There was use of ALP marketing material at schools. The cover your ears and go "La, la, la, la; I don't want to hear that" when she was at Bimberi are not signs of a minister who is across her brief or should be entitled to remain in the position. And, of course, there were 24 breaches of law during her time as the person responsible for care and protection.
We have got the CIT bullying issues. Every portfolio this minister touches something goes wrong. Of course, there are the delays in completing the Tuggeranong 55 Plus Club, where even the president of the club likened the delays to elephants giving birth. Indeed, there is the issue now surrounding the Tuggeranong Community Arts Association and the minister's handling of that process. Every portfolio this minister is given she screws it up.
Now, let us look at the appointment of the head of the Fringe Festival. We had a process for the 2013 festival which the minister herself said was a huge success. "The fringe is back in Civic Square" was the call, and then those people got sacked without any courtesy or without any process. That is the problem with this minister. Four years after the chair lost the job and got the Fringe Festival cancelled amid funding disputes and disagreement over risque content, he was reappointed. Burch brings him back with a procurement process that lacks any probity. She pretty much gave the guy the job without any due diligence. Recall that the Fringe Festival director applied to run the fringe in 2013 through a competitive arts funding process and was unsuccessful. He was unsuccessful against those that ran it in 2013 that brought it back to Civic. The media reported that he then lobbied the minister directly for the 2013-14 job and he got the job.
What sort of process is that—$20,000 a year over four years and $20,000 in-kind support for infrastructure and public liability insurance? Funding was deliberately placed as a separate line item in the budget intended to allow for more flexibility in employing the director. At the time Ms Burch made the public statement: 'We are keen to bring the flair and edge that Mr Gardner brought to Civic Square." Well, why did he not get that through the process that delivered the 2013 Fringe Festival to two other individuals? She announced the appointment citing "the successful return of the festival in 2013". Yes, but that was delivered by Mr Peter Williams and Mr Nick Byrne. They were the successful return, but then they lost out because there was no process.
Now, you would have thought the people who successfully delivered the project would at least get another crack at it, but that was not the case. In fact, they did not
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .