Mr BURKE - 2003-08-12
Yesterday, you said that for the waterfront development you preferred a single developer. Does the PricewaterhouseCoopers report recommend that the Wharf Precinct development and the exhibition and convention centre be undertaken by a single developer? If not, do other developers have a go? For example, could a developer who only proposes a convention centre be involved in the development, or are they excluded by your comments so far?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, again, if the Opposition Leader had asked for a briefing, he might understand more of these issues. Again, it is disappointing. We are going to the marketplace and we are looking for the best bids on what we have flagged for redevelopment. What we would be looking at is a consortium being developed. The expressions of interest will come from consortia, and I am expecting that there will be a local component of all of those. We will be going through an interim process …
Mr Reed: A deal has been done here. A deal has been done.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I find it offensive to hear the member for Katherine - a man who should understand these processes - sitting there in his ignorance and making offensive comments like: ‘A deal has been done’.
I am saying, on the public record: we are going to the market, we are looking for expressions of interest from consortia. We are hoping for a very competitive process because, from early indications, there is a lot of interest from around this country in building. There is a lot of interest from many different companies in being part of this redevelopment. What I am hoping for Territorians with this splendid development, is that we get one that will really be a landmark for the Territory. We will be making sure that it is tropical, it has good community ownership, and there are good recreational spaces. The convention and exhibition centre will be part of that. However, it will be commercial and residential, we will be able to build our cruise ship facility, and the navy will still be very welcome and an integral part of this.
The negativity coming from the opposition is almost un-Territorian. Only a few months ago, we had the Opposition Leader saying: ‘Why are you doing a report, just get on and do it’ - his words, get on and do it. We also had, within the last year, the man who was almost in tears saying: ‘Just spend, spend, spend’ - they are his words.
We are doing this with a lot of integrity, thought and detail. The basic difference is …
A member: Rubbish! A lot of collusion.
Mr Baldwin: Secrecy, non-transparency.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: … they talk about it, we are doing it.
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! If he wants to allege collusion, I would have thought that is unparliamentary and worthy of a more substantive debate …
Mr Baldwin: What, secrecy?
Mr STIRLING: Collusion amounts to conspiracy, amounts to corruption. I ask for it to be withdrawn, Madam Speaker. It is an unhealthy term to have on the Parliamentary Record.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes. I have to admit I did not hear it, minister, but I do think there have been far too many interjections.
Mr Baldwin: Bit sensitive, don’t you think?
Mr Stirling: No, not sensitive at all.
Madam SPEAKER: Order. Look, enough!
Ms MARTIN: So have some guts and name who you think we have colluded with. Come on, have some guts.
Mr Baldwin: No, show us your secret report, come on.
Ms MARTIN: Have some guts – no, you would not do that.
Mr McAdam: Do you want me to ask the question, Madam Speaker?
Madam SPEAKER: No, member for Barkly I am waiting for silence. Member for Barkly.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, again, if the Opposition Leader had asked for a briefing, he might understand more of these issues. Again, it is disappointing. We are going to the marketplace and we are looking for the best bids on what we have flagged for redevelopment. What we would be looking at is a consortium being developed. The expressions of interest will come from consortia, and I am expecting that there will be a local component of all of those. We will be going through an interim process …
Mr Reed: A deal has been done here. A deal has been done.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I find it offensive to hear the member for Katherine - a man who should understand these processes - sitting there in his ignorance and making offensive comments like: ‘A deal has been done’.
I am saying, on the public record: we are going to the market, we are looking for expressions of interest from consortia. We are hoping for a very competitive process because, from early indications, there is a lot of interest from around this country in building. There is a lot of interest from many different companies in being part of this redevelopment. What I am hoping for Territorians with this splendid development, is that we get one that will really be a landmark for the Territory. We will be making sure that it is tropical, it has good community ownership, and there are good recreational spaces. The convention and exhibition centre will be part of that. However, it will be commercial and residential, we will be able to build our cruise ship facility, and the navy will still be very welcome and an integral part of this.
The negativity coming from the opposition is almost un-Territorian. Only a few months ago, we had the Opposition Leader saying: ‘Why are you doing a report, just get on and do it’ - his words, get on and do it. We also had, within the last year, the man who was almost in tears saying: ‘Just spend, spend, spend’ - they are his words.
We are doing this with a lot of integrity, thought and detail. The basic difference is …
A member: Rubbish! A lot of collusion.
Mr Baldwin: Secrecy, non-transparency.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Ms MARTIN: … they talk about it, we are doing it.
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! If he wants to allege collusion, I would have thought that is unparliamentary and worthy of a more substantive debate …
Mr Baldwin: What, secrecy?
Mr STIRLING: Collusion amounts to conspiracy, amounts to corruption. I ask for it to be withdrawn, Madam Speaker. It is an unhealthy term to have on the Parliamentary Record.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes. I have to admit I did not hear it, minister, but I do think there have been far too many interjections.
Mr Baldwin: Bit sensitive, don’t you think?
Mr Stirling: No, not sensitive at all.
Madam SPEAKER: Order. Look, enough!
Ms MARTIN: So have some guts and name who you think we have colluded with. Come on, have some guts.
Mr Baldwin: No, show us your secret report, come on.
Ms MARTIN: Have some guts – no, you would not do that.
Mr McAdam: Do you want me to ask the question, Madam Speaker?
Madam SPEAKER: No, member for Barkly I am waiting for silence. Member for Barkly.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016