Page 2599 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 28 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
too many that have been agreed to. There is one agreed in principle and there is another agreed. But it basically says, “We have already given you this information.” But there are some that are simply not agreed. Recommendation 17, for instance, states:
The Committee recommends that scenario options 2 and 4 be included in the CB Richard Ellis Cost Analysis report.
That is just ruled out. They are just ruling it out. The response states, “We are not going to do that work.” The Assembly, through its committee, has asked that certain things be done and the government says, “No, we do not want that data. We do not want that information and we certainly do not want it public.” Again, for a Chief Minister who says that we are in a new era of openness and accountability, just to say no to these things I think shows that the same old practices are in place. Nothing has really changed. It is quite clear. You can change your leader but that does not change a government. In this case that would appear to be true.
There are some recommendations—for instance, recommendation 21—which was agreed to. I am grateful for that. The recommendation stated:
The Committee recommends that the ACT Treasury Directorate detail how all the claimed efficiency savings will be achieved …
The government responded:
Closer to the commencement of the project, rent, staffing and running costs will be reassessed and the appropriate amounts will be withdrawn from agency budgets within the relevant Budget year across the forward estimates—this information will be detailed in the Budget Papers.
I would have thought you would have that data now. You have done this work. You claim there are efficiencies and that there are savings. But we now find out that we actually will not find out what the savings are and how much they will be by directorate until much closer to the commencement of the project. That gives me some concern. We were assured that the work had been done, that this was sound. But now we find out that they have not broken it down and that that information will not be forthcoming at this time. The response states:
… this information will be detailed in the Budget Papers.
So clearly we will not have this, at the earliest, until next year and that does give me some concern. There are other recommendations that, in the main, have been noted. Recommendation 24 states:
The Committee recommends that should the Government office block proceed, it not be linked by a skybridge to the Legislative Assembly building.
They respond that that is noted, but they do go on to say:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video