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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (5 May) . . Page.. 1337 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

any lack of disclosure about the redevelopment? The answer is no. Was more than $12.3m of public money spent? The answer is no. Was the 1998-99 appropriation exceeded? No.

Did the Auditor-General qualify last year's accounts because of the transaction? The answer is no. Did the Chief Minister's Portfolio Committee make any reference to the validity of the transaction in their paper tabled just a couple of weeks ago? The answer is no. Is the Auditor-General currently conducting a comprehensive performance review of the redevelopment? The answer is yes. Do we have confidence in the Auditor-General to do his job? At least from this side of the house, yes. Has the redevelopment ensured that Canberra has a stadium that will be able to host Olympic soccer and maintain national sporting teams of the quality of the Raiders and the Brumbies? The answer is yes. Even Mr Stanhope made that comment. It is a great stadium.

Last week Kevin Neil of the Raiders said in the media that if it was not for the redevelopment of Bruce Stadium the Raiders would more than likely not be in this city. That is not my comment; that is Kevin Neil's comment. The same applies to the Brumbies. The upgraded stadium is required for professional football teams that cost what our football teams cost to get onto the paddock. Are all other jurisdictions hosting Olympic soccer conducting stadium redevelopments? The answer is yes. Does the redevelopment of Bruce Stadium exceed the functionality and quality of other redeveloped stadiums, given the investments made? The answer is yes.

The Labor Party themselves, even two weeks ago or three weeks ago, accepted that the Auditor-General's inquiry was a sensible way to go. They accepted that in committee comments to the Assembly. The Auditor-General is looking at this issue. We have confidence in the Auditor-General to do his job. But those opposite are playing politics. What does that mean? Those opposite are looking to have a number of documents tabled in this place. What for? Why? Does anybody in this Assembly have the expertise to understand complicated construction contracts?

Mr Hargreaves: Yes.

MS CARNELL: Who?

Mr Hargreaves: Mr Quinlan.

MS CARNELL: Why? I am happy to give him some tests on construction contracts. Are you an expert on construction contracts? I do not have the expertise to understand construction contracts, and I would suggest that nobody else in this place does either. (Extension of time granted) Nobody in this place has the expertise to understand the complexity of the documentation that Mr Stanhope has asked for. I also have to say that there are a number of areas where the papers involved could or should not be released, certainly not without the other party to the contract agreeing. The ACT Government is quite comfortable about the release of any of the documentation but we do have - - -

Mr Quinlan: What are we arguing about then?

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