Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 02 Hansard (Wednesday, 21 February 2018) . . Page.. 491 ..
It was a significant incident at a significant time in the day when people move around the city. The advice to me is that the actions taken by the contractor, although having been served an improvement notice, made the site safe as quickly as possible. Relevant agencies were on site to ensure both the safety of people in the region surrounding the incident and also that traffic and public transport flows could be redirected, because it was approaching peak hour.
MISS C BURCH: Minister, how could it be that your flagship infrastructure project with a union EBA has had such severe workplace safety problems resulting in serious injuries?
MS FITZHARRIS: If Miss Burch could back up her assertion about serious injuries, I would welcome that. Certainly, safety on the light rail site is a top priority for the government, for the board, for Transport Canberra and for Canberra Metro. It is a priority because it is a priority for our community. This major infrastructure project, which, as of today, has roughly 700 people working on site, is a significant project. There are multiple processes in place from the board level right through to the day-to-day operations on the site, in addition to the three light rail inspectors, which were quite clearly funded in last year’s budget. This is a priority. If there are opportunities to improve—and clearly last week demonstrated opportunities to improve—the consortium is very clear that the government’s priority is for safety on this site.
MR WALL: Minister, what other damage has been done to public infrastructure and/or utilities as a result of work associated with the light rail project? Is the project still expected to be delivered on time?
MS FITZHARRIS: Whatever damage has been done to infrastructure or utilities, it is the responsibility of the consortium to remediate it as quickly as possible. Yes, we do expect that the project will be delivered on time.
Mr Wall: Point of order, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: Point of order.
Mr Wall: It is on relevance. Could the minister be directly relevant and actually outline what other damage has occurred, not what the process is should other damage occur?
MADAM SPEAKER: Does the minister have information on what damage has occurred?
MS FITZHARRIS: No.
Mr Wall: Take it on notice?
MADAM SPEAKER: The minister has concluded her answer.