Pleasure Dome business case not in the public interest.

DermottBanana said :

Alaninoz says it best “without any supporting argument I say this is an obvious lie”.
Let’s all sit around and make assertions based on a complete lack of evidence.
Coz that’s what it’s all about, huh?

And what else can be done when the ACT Treasury won’t provide any evidence?

PantsMan said :

They even fudge the accounting treatments to made capital gains on the superannuation provision account appear a ‘revenue’. Easy $60 million thanks.

I love it! This must make the budget figures look bad when the returns on super are negative. Looks like we’re headed for a big unfunded obligation.

Mysteryman said :

Where is that thread that asks the question about the ACT government being corrupt….?

Total bunch of crooks.

Here: http://the-riotact.com/act-government-corrupt-or-not-corrupt-what-do-you-think-with-poll/52729

That place is so bent the Budget’s pretty much made up. The ‘conservative bias’ varies every year to that we’re inevitably $10-20 million in deficit, but with $50-150 million surpluses predicted into the future. They even fudge the accounting treatments to made capital gains on the superannuation provision account appear a ‘revenue’. Easy $60 million thanks.

The City Hill proposal – where people actually paid money for apartments and shops – did not get over the line, but the Pleasure Dome does? They see themselves as an extension of the Government, so their analysis is pretty likely to skewed. Frankly, I wouldn’t trust ACT Treasury to run a chook raffle.

Alaninoz says it best “without any supporting argument I say this is an obvious lie”.
Let’s all sit around and make assertions based on a complete lack of evidence.
Coz that’s what it’s all about, huh?

Open and honest government doesnt seem to be living up to the promise.

Gungahlin Al said :

Surely it is more along the lines of “why would you tell the world what your budget is before going to tender?”

Would be easy enough to excise any budgetary information, but I believe a figure of $432 million has been mentioned.

Surely it is more along the lines of “why would you tell the world what your budget is before going to tender?”
Seems like it’s more of a straightforward probity issue. If so, is this just a case of not letting the facts get in the way of a beat-up?

Unbelievable.

Not so much that the gubmint would want to keep informaton out of the public’s hands, but that Treasury is so openly doing their dirty work for them. We expect dishonesty from politicians, but definitely not from the public service.

Where is that thread that asks the question about the ACT government being corrupt….?

Total bunch of crooks.

I’m not a great fan of Zed, but he’s got it right this time. To examine some of the quotes:

‘contrary to the public interest’ – without any supporting argument I say this is an obvious lie. The only reason I can see for it not being in the public interest would be if the report contained confidential information, and there is no indication that this is the case. Confidentiality is, in any case, too often used as an excuse for hiding information.

‘confuse public debate’ – how can there be an informed public debate without the cost/benefit analysis?

“Treasury has used the excuse that some information in the business cases is outdated…” – then so is the business case and it should either be updated or not used as the basis for a decision.