Page 1333 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
concept for consideration to ensure a shared vision for providing infrastructure is achieved. Prioritising and delivering key infrastructure should not be seen to rest solely with government.
The Master Builders also had some suggestions, specifically on the number of board members appointed, which have been taken on board and are reflected in the new draft of the legislation. The Canberra Business Council has had input. They state:
The Council is very supportive of the development of a detailed, strategic and long term infrastructure plan for the ACT. As far back as March 2009, the Council wrote to the Chief Minister suggesting there was an urgent need for the development of a detailed infrastructure plan for the ACT.
This position is strongly supported by the Council’s kindred organisations.
In relation to the bill, it stated:
Canberra Business Council also supports the idea of an Infrastructure Commission.
And it went on to say:
It is adamant that the views of industry experts outside of government must be sought in determining future infrastructure needs and priorities for Canberra and the surrounding region.
The council also note that they have been pushing the government for a solution such as that contained in this bill, to little effect. In relation to the proposed solution from the government, it is stated:
… the Council’s concern is that, under the Government’s current model, industry will only be given an opportunity to comment on the Government’s infrastructure plan after it has been developed by the bureaucracy.
That is an important point, Mr Speaker. This plan seeks outside, expert contributions in the development of the plan right at the outset, something which business experts have commonly regarded as essential, yet the government views as anathema. I do sympathise with the council’s other points that there is a danger in too much bureaucracy. As Liberals, we have no issue with agreeing that government interference can cause as many problems as it solves.
I have two points to make on this topic. The first is that infrastructure planning and delivery is such a vital, fundamental aspect of governance that it must be driven correctly and competently from the top to be successful. A failure to plan is a plan to fail, as they say, and we can see those failures around our city every day. The second point is the glaring lack of any alternative. In light of this, we must progress with the tools we have to effect positive, constructive change.
The ACT and Region Chamber of Commerce and Industry “support this bill and its aims”. Again, there were specific comments; again, those were taken into consideration when preparing this draft, including ensuring that the board contain expertise in commercial and business skills.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video