Skills Minister Chris Steel has survived a no-confidence vote following a testy debate in the Legislative Assembly.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The opposition sought to oust the minister after millions of dollars worth of consulting contracts were awarded to a "complexity and systems thinker" by the Canberra Institute of Technology.
Mr Steel had raised concerns over the contracts more than a year ago, and told the institute he did not understand what the jargon-filled contract was actually for.
Opposition Leader Elizabeth Lee, who moved the no-confidence motion on Wednesday morning, called on Mr Steel to resign over the "inexcusable, unforgivable" series of consulting contracts.
Ms Lee said the Canberra Institute of Technology had ignored Mr Steel's concerns more than a year ago
"At best, he has completely lost the confidence of the CIT who has demonstrated clear contempt for the minister's apparent concerns. At worst, the minister has been complicit, for at least 15 months in these dodgy contracts," Ms Lee said.
Ms Lee said it was shocking that Mr Steel had raised concerns last year about previous contracts issued to a single consultant and his associated firms but nothing had been done to stop new contracts being signed.
The Opposition Leader said any member who voted in support of Mr Steel was helping to "run a protection racket that breeds the toxic culture that we see permeating through this astonishing misuse of public funds".
Mr Steel said he and the government were not defending the $4.99 million contract signed by the Canberra Institute of Technology, which was handled at arm's length from the government in line with the legislation that established the institute.
"If this procurement has been found to have been undertaken without integrity and probity - or if CIT cannot prove it presents value for public money - I will take further action," Mr Steel told the Assembly.
"I don't want to get ahead of ourselves, detailing what that action will be."
Chief Minister Andrew Barr leapt to Mr Steel's defence, saying there was no evidence to support a no-confidence motion, and took aim at the opposition for levelling personal attacks on Mr Steel's integrity.
"What we have heard this morning, if repeated outside this chamber, would see a number of members facing defamation action," Mr Barr said.
Mr Barr said the opposition had a poor understanding of the legislation that governs the Canberra Institute of Technology, and rejected any suggestion Mr Steel had broken the law.
"[This is] all about trying to get a ministerial scalp and so little about integrity in procurement," he said.
Greens leader Shane Rattenbury said the contracts did not pass the "pub test" and were concerning, but it was appropriate for the Auditor-General to consider the situation. The Greens did not support the no-confidence motion.
"I think on the face of it most people are scratching their heads and wondering about both the quantum and the detail of these contracts," Mr Rattenbury said.
Through a long and impassioned debate, Ms Lee was forced to the withdraw an interjection suggesting the government was making up "bullshit" while the opposition sought to make multiple points of order against the government.
Mr Steel had on Tuesday called on the Canberra Institute of Technology to explain the $4.99 million contract for the "complexity and systems thinker", after admitting he was unable to work out what the consultant was being paid to do.
The consultant, Patrick Hollingworth, is described on his website as a "complexity and systems thinker" who "looks for patterns and weak signals" and "works on reconfiguring organisational dynamics".
Mr Steel has also urged the territory's Auditor-General to examine a series of contracts CIT had awarded to Mr Hollingworth and his companies since 2017.
The amount of the latest contract - $4,999,990.00 - was $10 below the threshold at which the contract would have needed to go before the government procurement board.
The Skills Minister asked CIT how and why the institute determined the work was "necessary, efficient and appropriate" and what specifically would be delivered.
"What justification is there for such a large quantum of funding, at $4.99 million, being used for change management services of this nature? Were lower cost alternatives considered?" Mr Steel asked in a letter to Craig Sloan, the CIT board chair, seen by The Canberra Times.
READ MORE:
Canberra Institute of Technology chief executive Leanne Cover has sought to defend the contract, insisting the contracts with a consultant have sown "seeds of change" at the public education and training organisation.
"The service provision that we've been seeking has been to co-design new ways of working, new ways of getting data utilised and analysing what our students really need," Ms Cover told ABC radio on Wednesday morning.
Ms Cover said the price was based on market worth of the services provided by the consultancy firm.
We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.