Page 3139 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 12 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DUBY: I thank Ms Follett for her question. As she probably is aware, the roadworks at the corner of Majura and Wakefield Avenues were part of a series of contracts which had been let to R and G Shelley and Co. With that company going into liquidation, the Public Works department has entered into negotiations with other firms to continue and finish the work of the contracts that Shelleys has been involved in. To be honest, I cannot now remember the name of the firm which has been given the continuation of that contract. But I do know it was the next lowest tenderer on the original tender scheme for that roadwork.
In relation to when it will be completed, I guess, really, if Ms Follett wants the answer to that question, she should ask her friends at the Trades and Labour Council when they will lift bans on continuation of that work so that work for contractors can be continued and so that the people of Canberra will not be further inconvenienced through what I regard to be the irresponsible attitudes of the unions involved.
MS FOLLETT: I ask a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. I would ask Mr Duby also to advise the Assembly how many accidents have occurred because of the current disruptions to that intersection and to the roadworks on Limestone Avenue.
MR DUBY: I thank Ms Follett. Clearly I would not be in a position to give a figure off the top of my head. I do not know whether there have been any accidents at all, but I shall undertake to find that out. In searching my mind it has occurred to me now that the name of the firm which is completing the roadworks at the corner of Majura and Limestone Avenues is Guideline Pty Limited.
School Closures
MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, my question is to Mr Humphries as Minister for Education. Mr Humphries, the Treasury figures that were provided with reference to school closures, in its financial analysis of school closures of July 1990, suggested that the cost for traffic control for each of the new schools when schools closed would be $300,000; that was the allowance it made. On page 16 of your budget supplementary paper No. 3, you have allowed $200,000 all told for traffic control in just four schools. Seven schools, of course, are closing and if you multiply seven schools by the $300,000 Treasury estimate you get $2.1m, which is about 10 times the figure that you have presented. Can you tell us whether you are just not providing so many with traffic protection, or whether you are not using the same quality of traffic protection and hence putting kids at risk - or do you just have shonky figures?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .