Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works I present the committee's 75th annual report incorporating a supplementary statement and I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.

In accordance with standing order 39(f) the report was made a Parliamentary Paper.

by leave—The committee is required to present a report of its proceedings during the calendar year just ended, under section 16 of the committee's act. The year 2011 was a busy one for the committee, in which it conducted inquiries into 11 works with a combined total cost of $782.7 million. Appendix A of the report lists all inquiries completed by the committee in 2011 and the costs of the individual works. The committee also considered 48 medium works projects, with individual budgets of between $2,000,000 and $15,000,000. In 2011, the combined cost of all medium works notifications was $433.3 million. These projects are listed at appendix B of the report. The committee held 36 meetings and hearings throughout Australia during 2011, in Canberra, Brisbane, Albury, Darwin, Christmas Island, Point Cook, Scottsdale, Sydney and Nowra. These meetings are listed in appendix C of the report.

There are a few matters I would like to highlight. The committee takes very seriously its obligation to consider and report on each work as quickly as possible. In 2011, the average time from the referral of a work to tabling its report was 15 weeks. A number of works were deemed exempt from committee consideration in 2011, including the National Broadband Network Co. Ltd and Aboriginal Land Trusts. The committee's regulations were amended to include NBN Co. as a Commonwealth authority and therefore exempt from the committee's scrutiny. However, the NBN Co. is still subject to parliamentary scrutiny through the Joint Committee on the National Broadband Network. The honourable member for Mallee, the deputy chair, and his coalition colleagues on the committee have made a supplementary statement on this issue, which the member for Mallee will speak to.

The Aboriginal Land Trusts were exempted through an amendment to its own establishing legislation, the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. There may be genuine reasons why some agencies require an exemption from parliamentary scrutiny. For example, these could be for reasons of urgency or national security. However, the committee remains concerned that some agencies may seek to amend establishing legislation to avoid the scrutiny of the committee. Rather than being an impediment, the Public Works Committee inquiry process should be viewed as an opportunity for agencies to demonstrate that their project represents value for money and is fit for purpose.

Regarding the two matters that I just talked about, I would like to put on the record an assurance to the two agencies and ministers that they can have absolute confidence in the Public Works Committee, in its competence and in the way that it approaches the tasks that are before it. It does that in a very professional, technical and non-partisan way. That has been my experience on the committee to date.

I would also like to give special thanks to officers of the Special Claims and Land Policy Branch of the Department of Finance and Deregulation, who assist agencies in preparing their proposals for committee consideration. I thank members and senators, past and present, for their work throughout 2011. I particularly thank the deputy chairs of the committee in 2011. That is currently the honourable member for Mallee and previously was Senator Judith Troeth. I commend the report to the House.

John Forrest (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I wish to make some remarks on the supplementary statement in this report. The Public Works Committee has been operating for 99 years. It will be 100 years in September next year. It is a very good committee that does not bother with partisanship. It operates purely on the principle of what is in the best interests of the people of Australia, who provide the money that the agencies spend. Coalition members on the parliamentary joint standing committee feel very strongly about the exemptions that tend to keep occurring. This annual report, the 75th of this committee submitted to the parliament, makes reference to two of those—the Aboriginal land trusts exclusion and the exclusion of the National Broadband Network from scrutiny by the parliamentary Public Works Committee.

I think this is a travesty. I know the member for Pearce spoke on this at the resolution on the Aboriginal land trusts, but what needs to be understood quite strongly here is that the executive of the parliament does not own the money that gets spent by the agencies it regulates. It belongs to the people of Australia. The executives and governments of the day have very clever and creative ways of extracting this income from Australians. I think it is beholden on every single member of this chamber to exercise their responsibility to make sure that every single cent of those dollars is spent wisely and in a way that honours the objectives the parliament sets.

Back in 1913 the Public Works Committee was established after a long and tortuous debate to establish:

(a) the stated purpose of the work and its suitability for that purpose;

(b) the necessity for, or the advisability of, carrying out the work;

(c) the most effective use that can be made, in the carrying out of the work, of the moneys to be expended on the work;

(d) where the work purports to be of a revenue-producing character, the amount of revenue that it may reasonably be expected to produce; and

(e) the present and prospective public value of the work.

Also, it was to ensure the procurement processes satisfied the high standards of probity for Commonwealth projects.

I have served on this committee all of my parliamentary life here and I have rigorously pursued those principles. It has been an excellent committee where partisanship has been left at the door. I commend the current member for Page, who currently chairs the Public Works Committee, for continuing the tradition which has been operating, as I said, for close to 100 years. The committee has dealt with some very sensitive political subjects. It does not matter who is in government. I can remember times on the committee when we dealt with refugee detention centres. We got through that sensitively and in a way that observed those principles I made reference to.

I think it is a travesty that this has occurred. It is not sufficient to satisfy me that another joint standing committee has been established to supervise the activities of the National Broadband Network. I argue very strongly that that committee does not have the powers of the Public Works Committee. We have the capacity to subpoena uncooperative witnesses. The reality of dealing with commercial-in-confidence material in camera in a way that the people who provide it can have confidence that there will be no leaks comes from a commitment that is signed by every member of the committee to observe those principles.

The coalition members—for the first time ever, I believe, in an annual report of the Public Works Committee—have submitted a supplementary statement. I was grateful for the chair's cooperation to at least record some of the facts about those two exemptions. But we as coalition members did not think it went far enough and we wanted the House to note our concern and our desire that this trend for no other reason than to hide must stop if the parliament, including every single member of this place, is to observe our most critical responsibility—and that is to ensure that every cent from money that is provided by Australian taxpayers is spent wisely and judiciously. This committee has a reputation for rigorously pursuing those objectives. Coalition members thereby record their objections.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works I present the committee's report entitled Report 2/2012:referrals made in November 2011.

In accordance with standing order 39(f) the report was made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works I present the second report of 2012 addressing referrals made in November 2011. This report deals with two inquiries with a total estimated cost of $101.7 million. In each case, the committee recommends the House of Representatives agree to the works proceeding. Chapter 2 of the report deals with projects 2 and 3 of the Christmas Island New Housing Program referred by the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport. The two projects have an estimated cost of $11.1 million. Chapter 3 of the report considers Defence Housing Australia's proposed development and construction of defence housing at Ermington, Sydney. It is estimated this project will cost $90.6 million.

Let me first deal with the new housing program on Christmas Island. The new housing program on Christmas Island consists of three projects with a total allocated budget of $26.6 million. The committee was notified of project 1 in December 2010 as a medium works proposal of between $2 million and $15 million. The committee agreed to project 1 proceeding as medium works, provided that projects 2 and 3 were referred to the committee for full inquiry. Project 1 is likely to be completed in June this year and will deliver 16 new houses on Christmas Island at Drumsite village. In project 2, the department proposes to construct a further 14 houses at Drumsite. If the remaining budget allows, the department proposes to construct two further larger dwellings at a site called Silver City.

The department states new housing is needed on Christmas Island to reduce pressure on the local rental market. Constructing new dwellings will reduce the number of houses leased by the Commonwealth for staff providing essential services and support. The dwellings will encourage employees to live on the island for longer periods with their families, building strong and long-lasting relationships with the local community. The department also argues that current housing requires substantial and ongoing maintenance, as it is outdated and not fit for purpose. The new houses would use materials which can withstand the tropical climate and other conditions unique to the island. The design would reflect the needs of Commonwealth employees, and their families, who reside on the island.

The committee visited Christmas Island in June 2011, where it received a comprehensive briefing from the department on the new housing program. The department provided a further briefing on projects 2 and 3 before the hearings were held in Canberra on 2 March this year. The committee is satisfied from the detailed evidence provided that projects 2 and 3 of the Christmas Island New Housing Program are needed. The committee is also satisfied that the works will offer value for money for the Commonwealth.

I move to speak to the second inquiry of this report. Defence Housing Australia proposes to develop and construct 209 new dwellings at a designated site called AE2 Ermington in Sydney, at an anticipated cost of $90.6 million. The purpose of the project is to reduce the number of defence families residing in private rental accommodation in the Sydney area. Almost 36 per cent of defence families in Sydney are utilising Defence's rent allowance housing subsidy, which is significantly higher than the target of 15 per cent. The works would include road and civil infrastructure works as well as the construction of the dwellings. The project will be rolled out in four phases over a three-year period. Nine superlots, which can accommodate 228 apartments, will also be developed. The superlots will be sold and Defence Housing will have the option of utilising 30 per cent of the apartments for defence personnel.

The site at Ermington was previously owned by Defence, who prepared and sold the site for residential development. The site was a naval depot in World War II. This site has been named AE2 in recognition of its Navy heritage. AE2, the 'Silent Anzac', was the first Allied and Australian submarine to enter the Dardanelles Strait in 1915. The committee thanks AE2 Commemorative Foundation for its submission to the inquiry and for attending a public hearing in support of the name AE2. The housing project will be developed in accordance with the Ermington master plan. This plan was developed in consultation with the local community group, the Ermington Residents Committee. The committee was pleased to see that Defence Housing Australia has continued a positive working relationship with the Ermington Residents Committee and the wider local community. The committee would like to thank Mr Ken Newman, Chairman of the Ermington Residents Committee, for preparing a submission to the inquiry and for providing evidence during the public hearing.

The committee is satisfied that the proposed development and construction of defence housing at Ermington is needed. It will provide additional housing options for defence personnel and their families in the Sydney area. The committee is of the view that the development will be fit for purpose and will offer value for money for the Commonwealth. Indeed, the cost of the project will be recovered through the agency's sale and lease-back program.

I would like to thank members and senators for their work in relation to these inquiries. I would also like to welcome the member for Shortland to the committee and thank the member for Oxley for his service to the committee in this parliament. I commend the report to the House.