Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2014 Week 13 Hansard (Wednesday, 26 November 2014) . . Page.. 4072 ..


MR WALL: Minister, what confidence can ACT ratepayers have that the project will not fail, like the Clem7 tunnel in Brisbane and the Lane Cove and cross-city tunnels in Sydney?

MR CORBELL: I thank Mr Wall for the supplementary. I make the point that those PPPs failed because of the patronage risk assumptions taken by the private sector in those projects and the fact that they overestimated the amount of patronage, the amount of tollway revenue they would be getting.

In this project patronage risk resides with the territory. That is a very clear learning that the territory and, indeed, all PPP contracts around Australia have taken on board, which is: you need to avoid those issues by recognising that patronage risk is not something that is going to be borne by the private sector. And that allows the private sector to deliver more robust and realistic assumptions about their financing and their capacity to deliver the project.

MADAM SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Coe.

MR COE: Minister, why was the availability payment of perhaps $70 million to $100 million a year for finance costs not included in the full business case?

MR CORBELL: It was not included for reasons that I have previously outlined, particularly to the annual reports hearing.

MADAM SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Coe.

MR COE: Minister, has the ACT government decided to go for a public-private model because of the lack of transparency and the potential to hide various costs that would otherwise be able to be sought through FOI?

MR CORBELL: No, Mr Coe. I know he would like to build that conspiracy theory, Madam Speaker, but it is not the case. A public-private partnership allows us to transfer risk and deliver better value for money for taxpayers. That is why the government has chosen the model. We know that, when you look at the public sector comparator that is in the business case against the PPP option, the PPP option stacks up and is more favourable to taxpayers because the risk transfer delivers better value for money. That is why we are proceeding with this model.

Water—security

MS LAWDER: As infinitely rewarding as questions about the tram are for my electorate of Brindabella—

MADAM SPEAKER: Could you come to the question.

MS LAWDER: my question is actually to the Minister for Planning and it is about water security for Tharwa. Minister, the town, the Outward Bound facility and the surrounding area rely on personal water supplies, and in large part on a private tank


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video