Mr BURKE - 2003-08-14
Regarding the waterfront development, yesterday in parliament, and later by press release, your Chief Minister said:
National advertisements will be placed in early September 2003 calling for expressions of interest to develop the waterfront site - including a convention and exhibition centre - as a build, own, operate and transfer back to taxpayers after 25 years.
Why has the government decided that the waterfront development will be a build, own, operate and transfer project? Was it a recommendation of the consultants, or a separate government decision? Can you explain the elements of such a build, own, operate, transfer scheme?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the Opposition Leader has quite correctly said that the Chief Minister announced this development. I will ask the Chief Minister to explain to you all these questions you ask, for the simple reason that …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr VATSKALIS: I find it quite amazing that the Leader of the Opposition …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, are you going to transfer the question?
Mr VATSKALIS: Yes.
Madam SPEAKER: That is quite acceptable, you are able to do that.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the project is within the Office of Territory Development. That office is within the Department of Chief Minister. If the Opposition Leader had chosen, up until now - I believe a request has come through for a briefing. Well done! The briefing is from the Office of Territory Development, so you know where the question should be directed. It simply shows an ignorance and a lack of interest in this very important project.
Could I just make reference to the last three questions? Knock, knock, knock. That is all we are getting from the opposition about this project. The Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Oh, can you explain what a BOOT project is?’. What do you think the railway project is? That is a 50 year transfer; this is half of that. You know what the project is. You are simply trying to find more and more angles to knock what is such a significant project for the Territory. We heard on Tuesday how, once they had asked - I think it was nine - questions about it and each one negative with no support, they finally threw across the House: ‘Oh, and you have to be colluding with a developer’. No evidence, just more and more knocking of what is a significant and very important project. Yesterday, there was a burst of enthusiasm from right across our business community, leaving that lone and lonely voice of the opposition not supporting the project.
A BOOT project is a sensible way to approach this - a build, own, operate and transfer project. This is a piece of infrastructure, the convention and exhibition centre, that will make an immense contribution. A BOOT scheme is one of the ways of doing it. We believe - and we have looked at the railway project - on good advice, that this is the way to go, and 25 years ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: If the opposition would listen, we are talking about the convention and exhibition centre as a BOOT.
Mr Reed: That is not what you said yesterday.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine!
Ms MARTIN: It is absolutely what I said yesterday, but the cloth ears of the opposition do not listen.
We are talking about a BOOT scheme, used regularly around Australia. It is one thing that is encompassed in the projects we are talking about within public/private partnerships, a very accepted public/private partnership framework that, talking last week in Sydney to an infrastructure summit, was welcomed.
We are going to move forward in this process of building a convention and exhibition centre …
Mr Baldwin: Was it a recommendation of the report? That was the question.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly!
Ms MARTIN: … and the associated redevelopment of the wharf with accountability. It will be done carefully and professionally. We will have an independent probity auditor overseeing the whole project and, may I say, very akin to the railway project ...
Mr Baldwin: Was it the recommendation of the report?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly, that is twice. You are on a warning!
Ms MARTIN: So, stop, opposition, who we supported on the railway project. We supported and trusted the public sector advice to carry this through properly, yet cynicism, scepticism and knocking is all we hear from this opposition. It is extraordinarily disappointing. We will have a successful project, despite the opposition.
Mr Baldwin: And we will watch the process.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly, I need to give you a warning. If you have a question to ask, you know the process of asking it; not by interjection.
Mr BALDWIN: Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Now, member for Arafura.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I think someone stole his lollies at lunch time.
Mr BALDWIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I do not think she can reflect on me in that way.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, withdraw that.
Members interjecting.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: I have asked the member to withdraw. Enough! No further comments.
National advertisements will be placed in early September 2003 calling for expressions of interest to develop the waterfront site - including a convention and exhibition centre - as a build, own, operate and transfer back to taxpayers after 25 years.
Why has the government decided that the waterfront development will be a build, own, operate and transfer project? Was it a recommendation of the consultants, or a separate government decision? Can you explain the elements of such a build, own, operate, transfer scheme?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the Opposition Leader has quite correctly said that the Chief Minister announced this development. I will ask the Chief Minister to explain to you all these questions you ask, for the simple reason that …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr VATSKALIS: I find it quite amazing that the Leader of the Opposition …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, are you going to transfer the question?
Mr VATSKALIS: Yes.
Madam SPEAKER: That is quite acceptable, you are able to do that.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the project is within the Office of Territory Development. That office is within the Department of Chief Minister. If the Opposition Leader had chosen, up until now - I believe a request has come through for a briefing. Well done! The briefing is from the Office of Territory Development, so you know where the question should be directed. It simply shows an ignorance and a lack of interest in this very important project.
Could I just make reference to the last three questions? Knock, knock, knock. That is all we are getting from the opposition about this project. The Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Oh, can you explain what a BOOT project is?’. What do you think the railway project is? That is a 50 year transfer; this is half of that. You know what the project is. You are simply trying to find more and more angles to knock what is such a significant project for the Territory. We heard on Tuesday how, once they had asked - I think it was nine - questions about it and each one negative with no support, they finally threw across the House: ‘Oh, and you have to be colluding with a developer’. No evidence, just more and more knocking of what is a significant and very important project. Yesterday, there was a burst of enthusiasm from right across our business community, leaving that lone and lonely voice of the opposition not supporting the project.
A BOOT project is a sensible way to approach this - a build, own, operate and transfer project. This is a piece of infrastructure, the convention and exhibition centre, that will make an immense contribution. A BOOT scheme is one of the ways of doing it. We believe - and we have looked at the railway project - on good advice, that this is the way to go, and 25 years ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: If the opposition would listen, we are talking about the convention and exhibition centre as a BOOT.
Mr Reed: That is not what you said yesterday.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine!
Ms MARTIN: It is absolutely what I said yesterday, but the cloth ears of the opposition do not listen.
We are talking about a BOOT scheme, used regularly around Australia. It is one thing that is encompassed in the projects we are talking about within public/private partnerships, a very accepted public/private partnership framework that, talking last week in Sydney to an infrastructure summit, was welcomed.
We are going to move forward in this process of building a convention and exhibition centre …
Mr Baldwin: Was it a recommendation of the report? That was the question.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly!
Ms MARTIN: … and the associated redevelopment of the wharf with accountability. It will be done carefully and professionally. We will have an independent probity auditor overseeing the whole project and, may I say, very akin to the railway project ...
Mr Baldwin: Was it the recommendation of the report?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly, that is twice. You are on a warning!
Ms MARTIN: So, stop, opposition, who we supported on the railway project. We supported and trusted the public sector advice to carry this through properly, yet cynicism, scepticism and knocking is all we hear from this opposition. It is extraordinarily disappointing. We will have a successful project, despite the opposition.
Mr Baldwin: And we will watch the process.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly, I need to give you a warning. If you have a question to ask, you know the process of asking it; not by interjection.
Mr BALDWIN: Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Now, member for Arafura.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I think someone stole his lollies at lunch time.
Mr BALDWIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I do not think she can reflect on me in that way.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, withdraw that.
Members interjecting.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: I have asked the member to withdraw. Enough! No further comments.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016