Territory Stories

Debates Day 3 - Thursday 21 October 1993

Details:

Title

Debates Day 3 - Thursday 21 October 1993

Other title

Parliamentary Record 21

Collection

Debates for 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994

Date

1993-10-21

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Debates

Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/279555

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/418727

Page content

DEBATES - Thursday 21 October 1993 requested the Auditor-General's opinion regarding the project because the member for Millner was commenting publicly to an extent that I felt that we were ... Mr Parish: The Attorney-General has not even looked at Parliament House. He has not been near Parliament House. Mr MANZIE: The member should read the Hansard for yesterday before he starts making comments. He can read the letter I tabled which was a reply from the Auditor-General. I am quite happy with this reply, and I believe that the Auditor-General informed the members of the PAC of its contents. Mr Bailey: Table the letter. Mr MANZIE: It has been tabled, you clown! You did not listen to me. I said that members opposite should refer to the Hansard for yesterday. That is the trouble with you blokes. You do not believe in looking at any documentation that contains any accurate facts. You like to make things up and, when facts are put in front of you, you disregard them. You throw them away or contradict them. Mr Parish: Calm down, Daryl, or you will give yourself an ulcer. Mr MANZIE: The member for Millner has been caught out so many times that it has become a pleasure to have him make a public statement because I know that all I have to do is check it against the facts, release the relevant information and the media will say: 'There he goes again'. Members interjecting. Mr MANZIE: They do not like being caught out. Let us have a look at the benefits of this project. The investment in the project is impressive enough when we look at it in terms of job creation and stimulation of local industry. However, it becomes more important when we consider that every job on State Square actually creates at least one other job in areas of industry that are involved with the project. I am talking about joinery companies that build furniture, cement factories and companies that supply the raw materials to the cement factory. In fact, some industry experts maintain that the ratio of workers on the job to those in supporting industries is closer to 1:3* What I can say with certainty is that the Parliament House construction site has directly provided jobs for several hundreds of workers over the life of the project. Currently, the figure is about 190 full-time workers. In addition, 26 apprentices work both on-site and off-site. Analysis of the site records indicates that 450 000 on-site man-hours of labour were generated by the construction of the Supreme Court building. With work on the Parliament House about 71% complete, approximately 65O 000 on-site man-hours of labour have been generated through that construction. The same number of man-hours of labour have been created by related off-site activity. The total amount of labour generated by the project so far has been 2.2 million man-hours. If we take the figure of $12 an hour for the value of that work, the total amount of wages earned is about $26m. Essentially, that is money that is going into our community and supporting Territory families.


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.