Mr BAILEY - 1994-11-22
The Auditor-General's latest report states that the contractual arrangements for the Parliament House precinct give rise to an inherent conflict of interest for the project manager in the financial management of the project because the project manager's fee is related directly to the costs of the project. Can the minister indicate whether any of the current legal negotiations surrounding the project have dealt with this problem?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, firstly, any project manager's fee is connected in the same way as the member described. Secondly, we have a process whereby officers of the Department of Transport and Works have reviewed all claims to ensure that the appropriate payments are made. Of course, that is one of the reasons why there seems to be some disagreement at the moment. Obviously, the amounts that the developer believes to be appropriate differ from the amounts that officers believe to be appropriate.
Page 280
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr MANZIE: The member for Wanguri had the opportunity to question officers of the Department of Transport and Works very closely as to how this system works, and he did that during PAC processes. Probably, he has greater first-hand knowledge than I ...
Mr Bailey: That would not be hard!
Mr MANZIE: ... of those processes, and I suggest that he could refresh his memory by going over the transcripts that were made public. However, I believe that really he does not want facts. He wants simply to create some kind of obscure view in the community that something is not right. We know full well that everything has been done properly and that, every year, the Auditor-General examines all the payment processes and the PAC reviews his report. The situation is one ...
Mr Bailey: He does not. It is a blatant lie to say that he examines all the payment processes. You know that.
Mr MANZIE: I do not understand why the member for Wanguri attempts to drown me out.
Mr Bailey: That is the problem, Daryl. You do not understand.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is far too much screaming across the Chamber.
Mr MANZIE: Only one person is screaming, and that is the member for Wanguri. He becomes rather tiresome. I remind him to read through his PAC minutes, particularly the questions that he and the previous member for Millner asked officers in relation to this matter. I suggest that the member for Wanguri ...
Mr Bailey: Look, Daryl, private contractual arrangements with Multiplex and the subcontractor ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri. The honourable minister.
Mr MANZIE: He cannot help himself, Mr Speaker. He has his own version of the facts and, because it does not agree with the facts, he starts to make loud noises.
Nothing has been uncovered that suggests that, somehow or another, inappropriate claims have been made. In fact, the opposite has occurred. As I said, the situation we are going through at present is a result of the builder making claims for payment which have been assessed by the government, through the Department of Transport and Works, as being inappropriate. Mechanisms are in place to enable that to be sorted out whether, at the end of the day, it is done by negotiation, by arbitration or in a court of law. Those are the proper processes to deal with these issues. They will not be dealt with by politicians, as the member for Wanguri would suggest. Processes are in place that will take their course. Any attempt by the opposition or by the developer to attempt to embarrass the government into doing some kind of deal will not work. As I have said, everything has to be audited by the Auditor-General. That has been done in the past and it will be done in the future.
Page 282
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, firstly, any project manager's fee is connected in the same way as the member described. Secondly, we have a process whereby officers of the Department of Transport and Works have reviewed all claims to ensure that the appropriate payments are made. Of course, that is one of the reasons why there seems to be some disagreement at the moment. Obviously, the amounts that the developer believes to be appropriate differ from the amounts that officers believe to be appropriate.
Page 280
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr MANZIE: The member for Wanguri had the opportunity to question officers of the Department of Transport and Works very closely as to how this system works, and he did that during PAC processes. Probably, he has greater first-hand knowledge than I ...
Mr Bailey: That would not be hard!
Mr MANZIE: ... of those processes, and I suggest that he could refresh his memory by going over the transcripts that were made public. However, I believe that really he does not want facts. He wants simply to create some kind of obscure view in the community that something is not right. We know full well that everything has been done properly and that, every year, the Auditor-General examines all the payment processes and the PAC reviews his report. The situation is one ...
Mr Bailey: He does not. It is a blatant lie to say that he examines all the payment processes. You know that.
Mr MANZIE: I do not understand why the member for Wanguri attempts to drown me out.
Mr Bailey: That is the problem, Daryl. You do not understand.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is far too much screaming across the Chamber.
Mr MANZIE: Only one person is screaming, and that is the member for Wanguri. He becomes rather tiresome. I remind him to read through his PAC minutes, particularly the questions that he and the previous member for Millner asked officers in relation to this matter. I suggest that the member for Wanguri ...
Mr Bailey: Look, Daryl, private contractual arrangements with Multiplex and the subcontractor ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri. The honourable minister.
Mr MANZIE: He cannot help himself, Mr Speaker. He has his own version of the facts and, because it does not agree with the facts, he starts to make loud noises.
Nothing has been uncovered that suggests that, somehow or another, inappropriate claims have been made. In fact, the opposite has occurred. As I said, the situation we are going through at present is a result of the builder making claims for payment which have been assessed by the government, through the Department of Transport and Works, as being inappropriate. Mechanisms are in place to enable that to be sorted out whether, at the end of the day, it is done by negotiation, by arbitration or in a court of law. Those are the proper processes to deal with these issues. They will not be dealt with by politicians, as the member for Wanguri would suggest. Processes are in place that will take their course. Any attempt by the opposition or by the developer to attempt to embarrass the government into doing some kind of deal will not work. As I have said, everything has to be audited by the Auditor-General. That has been done in the past and it will be done in the future.
Page 282
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016