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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 8 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2196 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

In relation to car parking at the Australian Institute of Sport: yes, there will be dislocation of car parking on its existing provision on the western side of the AIS. The government has identified alternative car parking spaces to the equivalent amount that will be lost, around 1,400 car parking spaces, on a site on the northern side of the AIS campus within the same walking distance to Bruce Stadium as the car parking currently provided for that facility.

MS TUCKER: Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. My question really related to the cost. Could you please come back to the Assembly and tell us whether you will be carrying the cost of moving that parking, will you be needing to pay compensation to resume the lease, and will you be resuming the lease?

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, clearly the leasehold issues will need to be negotiated with the Australian Sports Commission, and that is the process the government will embark upon. In relation to any potential costs arising from that, I will take the question on notice and provide further advice to Ms Tucker.

Capital works

MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, last week members of your government announced that it was going to proceed with a series of capital works projects which had been included in this financial year's budget. These included the construction of Horse Park Drive, Drakeford Drive duplication, William Hovell Drive duplication, Barry Drive upgrade, and 20 or so bridges. These were costed by your government at $34 million. Are these projects the same as those that appear in the 2001/02 budget handed down in May last year?

MR QUINLAN: I will have to check the detail for you-off the top of my head, I have not got them all. But certainly there is rollover from last year's budget. Amid a great deal of fanfare, the Liberal government last year announced a very substantial capital works budget, I think intending to spend something in the order of $160-plus million, which I think included those projects. Let me refer to the latest estimate I have on the capital works returns. Extending on the reports which I think were tabled in this place at the last sitting, I think the estimated expenditure for this year is about $120 something million.

The capital works project of last year will not be reached. What comes forward, of course, is the rollover of some of those projects that are necessary, and the normally expected work in process is rolled forward because not all those projects are going to be completed in one year. I think I have said this in public, so I can say it before the budget speech is delivered: there is an anticipation that there will be a very solid capital works program through the next financial year as a result of what has been effectively undone in the current financial year.

MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Treasurer, if the costings of $34 million that you have already agreed to and that were prepared for these road projects were correct last year, and are still correct as per your government's announcements last week, why have you been unable to accept last year's estimate for the Gungahlin Drive extension, which was $32 million and which your cabinet colleague, Mr Corbell, now claims cannot be built as a four-lane road but rather as a two-lane road, although it was estimated and agreed to in the last capital works?

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