Page 88 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 9 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
independent expert found that this was not the case and that the delays in the finalisation of the project were due to the delay in the completion of the security system.
I cannot leave unsaid what the expert arbitrator determined in his decision. He said:
… the security services installation commission and testing activities were causing a delay in reaching completion and that this delay was within the control of BLL.
Bovis Lend Lease has not challenged the expert’s determination.
While acknowledging the committee was not privy to this decision, because its active inquiry work preceded this decision by some months, I draw to the attention of the Assembly the fact that the findings of the expert and the findings of the committee are at odds, even though the committee had access to the same sources of information as the expert arbiter.
What also amazes me is that in not one of the committee’s findings is the builder, Bovis Lend Lease, or its security subcontractor, Chubb, mentioned. They were the two organisations at the heart of this project and at the heart of the problems that developed, and yet, based upon the wording of the committee’s findings, they are of no import at all. I acknowledge that those companies are not subject to the recommendations of the committee, but how and why were they so completely ignored in the findings?
The independent expert has found that the government was not responsible for delays in opening the AMC post September 2008, instead ruling that contractor Bovis Lend Lease and subcontractor Chubb did not satisfy their contractual obligations for installing the AMC’s internal security system. This is indicated in the government response that I table today. The claim made by Bovis Lend Lease that other factors were the cause of the delays is incorrect.
Other matters operated concurrently, but the finding by the committee that there were delays other than the delay in the security system that affected the commencement of operations of the AMC is completely unsubstantiated. The contractor’s failure to properly install the security system is the reason for delays past September 2008. That is the position I have always maintained, and it has now been upheld by the independent expert appointed to arbitrate these disputes. As a result of this finding by the independent arbiter, the territory will pursue liquidated damages, which is still being negotiated and is subject to other processes.
The committee, chaired by Mrs Dunne, failed to objectively consider the circumstances surrounding the delay in the prison project. Its report is inconsistent with the findings of the independent expert. The government was not responsible for delays from September 2008 onward. The decision by the independent expert confirms that the government position was correct throughout and that the committee inquiry has fundamentally proven to be a complete waste of time.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video