Page 2058 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 21 June 2011

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

As Minister for Transport, I requested Roads ACT convene a working group to review the top two ranked projects in each of Canberra’s six districts to confirm the physical feasibility, the treatment type, the project cost and the cost effectiveness of the projects;

The cost effectiveness for the projects will adapt a recognised economic appraisal method and will include a ranking of projects on the basis of the ratio of the benefits to the cost of the projects; and

The working group will report to me in July 2011 and I will use the advice to consider which projects should be included in the 2011-12 and forward year’s programs for the Walking and cycling Infrastructure Program.

Select Committee on Estimates 2011-2012

Report 1

MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (11.36): Pursuant to order, I present the following report:

Estimates 2011-2012—Select Committee—Report—Appropriation Bill 2011-2012, dated 17 June 2011, together with a copy of the relevant minutes of proceedings and answers to questions on notice and questions taken on notice (4 volumes).

I move:

That the report be noted.

Madam Assistant Speaker, as a member of the committee, you will no doubt enjoy being relieved of the burden of distributing what has turned into rather a large document. It is a substantial document and I am very pleased that it is a document to which no dissenting report has been attached. At this stage I am going to ask that the copy I just tabled come back, because it is my marked-up copy. That would be very kind.

It is a good document in that it does canvass what turned out to be quite a difficult period, I think, for all concerned, in that we did have the resignation of the Chief Minister halfway through the budget process itself, which then led to changes in ministries, changes in admin arrangements. We basically got it right. I think we had Mr Corbell appearing for one organisation that he was not responsible for. I would thank all those involved, particularly the secretariat staff, for the way that they handled the process.

It is a report that is divided into a couple of sections. The first paragraph is an introduction. The introduction, as you would, looks at some of the issues across the budget papers and across the whole process—things like questions not answered that should be answered and if they are not answered by the end of the budget debate they get transferred to the notice paper. We have also made a suggestion that the Speaker investigate extending Committees on Demand as a permanent feature.

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