Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Public Works, I present three reports of the committee as listed at item 15(c) on today’s Order of Business and seek leave to move a motion in relation to the reports.

Leave granted.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the reports.

I seek leave to incorporate a tabling statement in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The statement read as follows—

On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works I present the Committee’s second, third and fourth Reports of 2007.

Each of these works reflects the diversity of the Committee’s activities over the last six months of the current year.

Report number two of 2007 relates to the redevelopment of the Defence Force School of Signals at Simpson Barracks, Watsonia in Victoria, necessitated by a decision of the Government to collocate training campuses into one central campus.  The estimated out-turn cost of these works is $101.3 million.

Simpson Barracks, Watsonia is the primary campus for the Defence Force School of Signals, with other smaller campuses located at HMAS CERBERUS, at Flinders, also in Victoria and at Borneo Barracks in Queensland.

The rationalisation for the collocation of these campuses is based on a number of advantages that will be delivered to the signals, electronic warfare and communications and information systems training provided to members of the Australian Defence Force as well as training provided to members of the armed services from countries for which Australia provides a level of training above that available to our regional allies.

In addition to these advantages, there will be an opportunity to consolidate the location of training staff, as well as freeing-up facilities for other purposes.

In scrutinising these works, the Committee had some concerns with the overlap between the provision of living-in accommodation that would deliver some 216 rooms, and a program of works associated with Project Single LEAP Phase 1 that has previously delivered 1,395 single living-in accommodation rooms.

Where there are value for money considerations, the Committee was of the view that accommodation projects should be contained within the Single LEAP project works.  While Defence advised that the issue in the case of Watsonia was one of timing, the Committee believes that this issue could have been addressed by more comprehensive planning – especially since economies of scale may offer savings to the Commonwealth.  An appropriate recommendation has been made by the Committee in its Report to this effect.

There is also a question over the future intentions of Defence in the context of the relocation of the training wing at Borneo Barracks in Queensland.  If this were not to proceed, there may be savings to be gained, and the Committee has made an appropriate recommendation in its Report seeking advice from Defence on the future of this campus.

Mr President, I turn now to the third Report relating to the National Towers Program Stage 1 that will apply to airports located at Adelaide, Canberra, Melbourne and Rockhampton, and will involve the rebuilding or refurbishment of control towers at an estimated out-turn cost of $94.5 million.

The Committee appreciates these works being referred, since the costs associated with the project are not provided by the Commonwealth.

Rather, the funds are commercially derived from levies paid by airlines and aircraft operators to Airservices Australia as a ‘fee for service’.

Nevertheless Airservices Australia provides a valuable service to Australia’s travelling public, and as the Committee noted it would seem fitting that there be some level of scrutiny associated with the proposed works.

Mr President, moving now to the fourth Report that relates to Lavarack Redevelopment Stage 4.

This proposal also originates with the Department of Defence, and builds on previous works considered by the Committee as Stage 3 in 2001.

It is from Lavarack Barracks that members of the Australian Defence Force are deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as being the home to a number of other Army units.

The proposed works envisage an ongoing program of building remediation, new office accommodation, and facilities to maintain and service newly acquired vehicles and field guns, and to keep abreast of other technologies now available to the Army.  These works will be provided at an estimated out-turn cost of $207.2 million.

The Committee was pleased to note that the proposed works will be spread across a mix of new and refurbished buildings, and that this methodology has delivered savings compared to an overall rebuild proposal.

However it was apparent from the Committee’s inspection of the proposed sites for these works, and from comments made by the department during the course of the Committee’s Inquiry that maintenance works had been neglected, with consequences for the expenditure of a significant sum of Commonwealth money to redress the status of the Lavarack estate.

In evidence Defence acknowledged that the lack of maintenance due to changing priorities in funding was a problem, prompting the Committee to recommend in the Report that consideration be given to the development of an ongoing maintenance program, together with appropriate and dedicated funds for this purpose.

Australia’s military history is also bound up with the Lavarack Barracks.  During the Vietnam conflict Lavarack provided training to Australian troops being sent to the Vietnam theatre of operations and there are a number of remaining buildings on base that are representative of that era.

The Committee has recommended in its Report that Defence consult with the relevant government department with a view to obtaining an assessment as to the heritage value of these buildings.

The Committee was disappointed with the quality of consultation between Defence and stakeholders.  Of particular concern were the comments made by the regional commander of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Services regarding fire alarms and the possibility of false alarms to which his members needed to respond, and the lack of consultation between his agency and Defence at the early stages design phase of the project.  Similarly there appeared to be an issue with the Queensland Road Traffic Authority regarding upgrades to the roads in proximity to the base.

The Committee has recommended that Defence accept the concerns raised by both agencies, and consider the comments of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Services early in the design phase, and in the case of the Queensland Road Traffic Authority as soon as practicable.

Finally Mr President, I would like to thank all those who contributed to these inquiries, including my fellow Committee members, officials of the Department of Defence, and those of Airservices Australia, and for the assistance of the Committee Secretariat.

Mr President, I commend the Reports to the Senate.

Question agreed to.