Page 3773 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the territory’s record. To put this in perspective, this is over seven times more than what those opposite delivered in their last year of government.
In their motion the opposition allege that this is some sort of either/or option, that if the office block goes ahead, if we seek to accommodate our public servants in better accommodation, then other infrastructure will be neglected. This is not the case. The proposed new building is a substitution for existing owned buildings and rental streams. Given that it will have a market value greater than the construction cost, it will actually improve the territory’s balance sheet. Additionally, co-location of a number of ACT public servants in Civic actually makes a range of public transport projects more viable. This is especially the case when combined with the government’s plans to revitalise Northbourne Avenue and to have more people living in the city.
So as you see, Mr Speaker, this motion is simply made up of wild accusations that bear no relationship to the facts. The opposition calls on the government to release all documents. Sixteen very large and detailed documents relating to project costing and financial analysis have already been released. I note that there has been no comment from the private sector disputing the content of the financial analysis.
Finally, Mr Speaker, the opposition call for the project to be scrapped. The ACT government’s public servants must be housed somewhere. If not in the buildings that we propose, then where? If not in buildings owned by government, then in buildings that we must pay rent on for 25 years and beyond. If not in buildings that meet our environmental responsibilities, then in buildings that make the problem worse. And if not in buildings that provide our staff with safe and professional surrounds, then in buildings which will make it even harder to attract and retain the best workers.
Of course, this apparently does not bother the Canberra Liberals. They do not care much about Canberra public servants. It is this Leader of the Opposition who opined on many occasions that Canberra workers were never better off, in fact, than under John Howard’s extreme and unfair workplace laws. He is on the record consistently as making those statements. And it is the same Leader of the Opposition who seems perfectly content for his federal Liberal counterparts to sack 12,000 Canberrans if they were to form a future federal government.
The government remains open minded about how to deliver the best outcome for workers, the environment and taxpayers. We are market testing the delivery of new accommodation in Gungahlin and in Civic, a move welcomed by the Property Council. We are steadfast in our determination that the Gungahlin project will go ahead; it is our first priority. The only thing the opposition is firm on, once again, is opposition for opposition’s sake.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (3.11): No-one disputes the significance of the government office building project. It is a very large amount of money and it would be a very significant infrastructure project and certainly not something that we should rush into. That said, I think we should all accept the reality that the status quo or do nothing approach is simply not viable and we have to do something. It is not acceptable to leave ACT public servants in low-grade office space. The business as usual option is not an option.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video