Page 1949 - Week 05 - Thursday, 5 May 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
where revenue collection and service delivery play second fiddle to propping up bad practices, nothing seems to change.
For all the talk Mr Stanhope occasionally makes about the much-needed reforms and the disappointment he has with the network, nothing ever changes. Either he does not have the willpower to make the change or he does not have the power to because of Labor backroom arrangements.
The people of Canberra deserve better than this. They cannot manage the purchase of new buses; they cannot manage the roll-out of ticket machines; they cannot manage timetable changes; they cannot manage route changes; and they cannot manage their staff IR negotiations.
It is hard to say what is the best area of ACTION. It is hard to say what area of ACTION is actually performing well. I have confidence in the capability of ACTION staff. I just wish that the minister would listen to their advice and empower them to make the changes they know need to happen to the network.
After all, the cost per boarding for ACTION is now up to $6.49, up from $6.18, and the cost per kilometre is up to $4.33, up from $4.27. And it is worth noting that the quantified mismanagement of the ticketing system through the old faulty machines cost $4.381 million. This figure is a disgrace. There are real consequences to government mismanagement, and this incompetence should be highlighted today.
As I said in the Assembly yesterday, the Gungahlin Drive extension is symbolic of ACT Labor. It is indicative of their disregard for Gungahlin residents, their lack of consideration for taxpayers’ money, their inability to plan for the future and their arrogance in placing expensive public art projects on the side of the road for motorists caught in traffic jams to be forced to observe. Yesterday Mr Stanhope said:
We do accept … that the road has had its moments.
He is correct—every morning and every afternoon. In 2001 Labor said it would cost $53 million. Now the cost will be $194 million, at best.
Then there is the government’s spending of an extra $1 million on mowing services in 2010-11 because of additional rainfall which spurred growth. However, where were the savings when rainfall and growth were below average? A benefit of outsourcing projects such as mowing is being able to scale up and being able to scale down. We have not seen these benefits.
Again, we saw this government’s mismanagement of ACTION’s ticketing system cost over $4 million. And the government then cries poor, having to spend an extra $1 million on core business such as mowing. This government cannot manage our budget.
We also saw Roads ACT resurface 25 per cent less municipal roads than targeted. Again, can rainfall really be blamed for 25 per cent less? Did we also have comparable savings?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video