Builders say 'crocodile tears' not enough after serious corruption findings

The Master Builders says the ACT government has "marked their own homework" and not done enough to stamp out the risk of serious corruption following corruption findings that showed a union's interests were favoured in a public tender process.

Subscribe now for unlimited access.

or signup to continue reading

Master Builders ACT chief executive Anna Neelagama. Picture by Gary Ramage

The industry group called for an independent procurement commissioner and a taskforce to investigate concerns, along with tougher tests before officials can be appointed to decide which companies are awarded contracts.

"The ACT community deserves more than crocodile tears and hollow assurances. The government's response falls well short of the meaningful reform needed to restore public confidence," Master Builders ACT chief executive Anna Neelagama said.

The Secure Local Jobs Code, a pre-tender approval process, had failed local workers and businesses and should be abolished, the group said.

Neelagama said the government's response to the Operation Kingfisher findings had been little more than a "tepid appetite for change" that favoured the status quo.

Ms Neelagama questioned whether an internal review of procurement decisions had done enough to ensure similar corruption and failures had not occurred.

"They have effectively marked their own homework, declared 'nothing to see here', and expected the Canberra community to simply move on," Ms Neelagama said.

"When serious failures of public administration are exposed, the answer cannot be more internal reviews and assurances that existing processes are adequate.

"Every Canberra taxpayer has a stake in this. They deserve to know that every dollar spent on public infrastructure is subject to fair competition, independent scrutiny and genuine value-for-money considerations."

The commission found the Education Minister's chief of staff and the head of the Education Directorate engaged in serious corrupt conduct by favouring a union-preferred company that won the work.

The project was awarded to Lendlease over Manteena despite two separate tender evaluation teams finding that Manteena had a superior design and cheaper bid.

The ACT government's formal response to the findings was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on Tuesday, which said the government had taken immediate steps to address the issues.

"The government's focus now is on responding to the commission's findings and observations and ensuring Canberrans can continue to have confidence in the integrity, accountability and transparency of their public institutions," the response said.

The response said a review of Education Directorate construction procurements with a total spend over $500,000 between 2019 and 2024 had found no evidence of improper influence in any procurement process.

"The Chief Minister has tasked the ACT Public Service to undertake a comprehensive review of procurement decisions for construction projects with a total spend of over $500,000 across all portfolios, between 2019 and 2024, to provide assurance on decision-making processes," the response said.

"The findings of the review will be considered in determining any appropriate future examinations, including whether referral pathways should be pursued."

The government said changes to procurement laws had made the system more efficient, flexible and accountable.

"Throughout the reform process, core principles of value for money, transparency, probity and evidence-based decision-making remained unchanged," the government's response said.

The Master Builders called on the government to issue a formal apology to Manteena, set up an independent complaints system for businesses to raise concerns about live tenders and probity officials to oversee major government construction projects.

The industry group also called for mandatory public reporting of union contact related to government procurement and mandatory checks to make the government consider if local companies can handle contracts before interstate firms are considered.

"A $1 million difference on an $18 million project might be dismissed as history. But apply that same percentage to a $1.3 billion construction pipeline and the potential cost exceeds $70 million. That is not a finding of further losses, but it illustrates why independent scrutiny and value for money matters," Ms Neelagama said.

More from Public Service