The tunnel or the shaft?
The Sydney Cross City Tunnel drama is turning to farce. After the State Government said it would not then said it would reveal all the contracting details (http://guambatstew.blogspot.com/2005/10/i-can-see-clearly-now.html), it turns out it didn't. In fact there appears to have been a little "side agreement" that allowed the contractors to bump up the toll, and this was not revealed.
The Minister in charge of Roads at the time the deal was done, and who signed off on it, is still a Minister, but in a different portfolio, so of course it was not his bad when the side deal wasn't revealed. So what does any responsible Government do? I wouldn't have a clue. Haven't seen one of those in yonks, so I don't have anything to go on.
But what this Government has done is shoot the Senior Civil Servant in charge of the Roads and Traffic Authority. Well not actually. Like Ms Miers, he tendered his resignation , and they accepted it. (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rta-boss-quits-over-tunnel-fiasco/2005/10/27/1130400311081.html) Well, not actually that, either. I'm hearing that he still has his same civil service classification with his $400,000+/year salary and is waiting out the heat in another chair.
And to add futher salt to the taxpayers' wound, it turns out the whole process of getting these PPPs is flawed because the Government has failed to implement even the simplest form of cost analysis that it was meant to have.
This from yesterday's SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/wrong-method-costing-state-billions-report/2005/10/26/1130302838987.html):
"In deciding whether to enter a public-private partnership to build and operate projects such as the Cross City Tunnel, the Government produces a document called a public sector comparator, which is the hypothetical cost of the Government delivering the project. While the Government promised in 2001 it would publish the comparator and the assumptions used to calculate it, the report says this has not happened and is a matter of "deep concern".
"NSW taxpayers may have lost billions of dollars in recent years because the Government uses a flawed method to calculate the cost of the public sector delivering new infrastructure such as the Cross City Tunnel, a report says.
The report, written for Unions NSW by a Sydney University accounting professor, Bob Walker, and a former NSW Treasury economist, Betty Con Walker, argues that in its effort to avoid public borrowings, the Government overstates the real cost of the public sector delivering projects such as the tunnel.
"The evidence "suggests that bureaucrats trying to avoid government borrowings means that the public pays a higher price for a whole range of public infrastructure and after about 15 years of experience the public service is still on a flat learning curve", the authors found. Professor Walker said: "Setting up deals that are no cost to Government means they are high cost to the public."
"The report, to be submitted to a parliamentary accounts committee investigating public-private partnerships says the guidelines used by Government to work out the cost of public-funded projects "reflect a systematic bias against conventional public sector delivery". Professor Walker said the State Government had access to cheaper money than the private sector and did not need to pay state taxes - but these advantages were not included when bureaucrats calculated the cost of the state building projects such as the tunnel."
The State Government is running so hard to to deflect the headlines from the scandals this is revealing that it is even backing down on its "get tougher" on terror policy deal it did with Howard, (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/cracks-in-terror-solidarity/2005/10/27/1130400311063.html).
The Minister in charge of Roads at the time the deal was done, and who signed off on it, is still a Minister, but in a different portfolio, so of course it was not his bad when the side deal wasn't revealed. So what does any responsible Government do? I wouldn't have a clue. Haven't seen one of those in yonks, so I don't have anything to go on.
But what this Government has done is shoot the Senior Civil Servant in charge of the Roads and Traffic Authority. Well not actually. Like Ms Miers, he tendered his resignation , and they accepted it. (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rta-boss-quits-over-tunnel-fiasco/2005/10/27/1130400311081.html) Well, not actually that, either. I'm hearing that he still has his same civil service classification with his $400,000+/year salary and is waiting out the heat in another chair.
And to add futher salt to the taxpayers' wound, it turns out the whole process of getting these PPPs is flawed because the Government has failed to implement even the simplest form of cost analysis that it was meant to have.
This from yesterday's SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/wrong-method-costing-state-billions-report/2005/10/26/1130302838987.html):
"In deciding whether to enter a public-private partnership to build and operate projects such as the Cross City Tunnel, the Government produces a document called a public sector comparator, which is the hypothetical cost of the Government delivering the project. While the Government promised in 2001 it would publish the comparator and the assumptions used to calculate it, the report says this has not happened and is a matter of "deep concern".
"NSW taxpayers may have lost billions of dollars in recent years because the Government uses a flawed method to calculate the cost of the public sector delivering new infrastructure such as the Cross City Tunnel, a report says.
The report, written for Unions NSW by a Sydney University accounting professor, Bob Walker, and a former NSW Treasury economist, Betty Con Walker, argues that in its effort to avoid public borrowings, the Government overstates the real cost of the public sector delivering projects such as the tunnel.
"The evidence "suggests that bureaucrats trying to avoid government borrowings means that the public pays a higher price for a whole range of public infrastructure and after about 15 years of experience the public service is still on a flat learning curve", the authors found. Professor Walker said: "Setting up deals that are no cost to Government means they are high cost to the public."
"The report, to be submitted to a parliamentary accounts committee investigating public-private partnerships says the guidelines used by Government to work out the cost of public-funded projects "reflect a systematic bias against conventional public sector delivery". Professor Walker said the State Government had access to cheaper money than the private sector and did not need to pay state taxes - but these advantages were not included when bureaucrats calculated the cost of the state building projects such as the tunnel."
The State Government is running so hard to to deflect the headlines from the scandals this is revealing that it is even backing down on its "get tougher" on terror policy deal it did with Howard, (http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/cracks-in-terror-solidarity/2005/10/27/1130400311063.html).
Labels: PPPs
posted by Guambat Stew at Friday, October 28, 2005
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home