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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 3362 ..

MR QUINLAN: The transcript of which has since been authorised for publication. You were advised before the meeting commenced that that was a distinct possible outcome. The committee asked the obvious question: what is the expected final cost? We are all grown-ups and we expect that nothing is absolutely certain in life, but a more precise figure than $200 million was given to the committee, a figure that included specific hundreds, tens and units of millions of dollars. It was, I would say, considerably more than the $200 million.

Mr Corbell: He didn't mislead the Assembly, did he?

MR QUINLAN: Certainly, the public accounts committee was advised of a precise figure.

Mr Moore: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Corbell has interjected about misleading the Assembly. I think he needs to withdraw that.

Mr Corbell: I asked the question. I didn't make an allegation.

Mr Moore: It is an imputation, Mr Speaker. If you ask, "Have you misled the Assembly?" it is an imputation and needs to be withdrawn.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Corbell, did you do that? If so, withdraw.

Mr Corbell: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.

MR QUINLAN: I did resist the temptation to answer that question. I can say yes, the public accounts committee was given a far more precise figure.

MR HARGREAVES: Thank you very much, Mr Quinlan. At least we got an answer to a question. My supplementary question is: can the chairman of the committee tell the Assembly whether the Chief Minister was present at the hearing when the estimate was provided, and was there sufficient discussion on the particular topic to ensure that everyone present was clear on the figure?

MR QUINLAN: Thank you, Mr Hargreaves. I should have said that in my first answer. Yes, the Chief Minister and Treasurer was present at that part of the hearing, although he was not there for the whole hearing and, yes, there was discussion around this number. There was discussion around what it represented in further capital to be raised.

I was not in the house last week, but I can tell you that the Chief Minister was present when a far more precise number was mentioned and discussed to the point of defining what it represented in additional capital to be raised beyond that which has been raised in the latest contribution or commitments that have been made.

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