Page 4204 - Week 13 - Thursday, 25 November 1993

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Mr Kaine: When I know the actuals for this year, I will compare that figure to the actuals last year, and that is a secret yet to be revealed.

MR BERRY: If you are in accounting, one of the basic rules is to compare like with like, and that is what you are not doing. Do not try to pull that fast one here. I would not let you near my books, because you fiddle the figures. There is no question about that. That is what you have tried to do in this debate. As with the rest of your contribution on this matter, it was just a whole load of rubbish.

Remainder of Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.


Report on 1993-94 New Capital Works Program - Government Response

Debate resumed from 23 November 1993, on motion by Ms Follett:

That the Assembly takes note of the paper.

MS SZUTY (5.30): Madam Speaker, I suppose that we are not going to debate Government responses at length because of the hour of the day. I do not wish to take terribly much time of the Assembly, but certainly I, as a member of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee, appreciate the comments that the Government has made in its response to the report. The report provides an important opportunity for the Government to listen to not only the views expressed by the committee but also the views expressed by industry and community groups. I would like to comment briefly on the Government's response to a number of the recommendations of the Planning Committee which it has not fully adopted.

The Planning Committee, for the first time, in 1993 referred extensively to the question of value management, and we were very keen for the Government to take up the question of value management as it applies to capital works projects. I note that the Government proposes that, beginning in 1994-95, a limited number of projects having a capital cost of over $1m and selected across agencies be assessed on a value management basis. My interpretation of that comment, Madam Speaker, is that the information gathered from that trial will provide a basis for any future decisions on whether more capital works projects are assessed from the value management perspective. I think the committee is very keen to see the value management approach adopted for capital works projects overall, and I certainly hope that the trials that the Government is going to introduce will lead to a more extensive consideration of the value management approach in future consideration of capital works projects.

I noted that recommendation 10 - that information on the three-, four- or 10-year indicative works design program of each agency be included in the documentation provided to the Executive and then to the Planning Committee - was disagreed with by the Government, basically on the grounds of possibly increasing the expectations of the community as to what capital projects would go ahead at what time. I suppose, Madam Speaker, that I viewed the Government's response to this recommendation as being very negative. It is easy to think that

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .