For every piece of new information that emerges in the Canberra Institute of Technology $8.5 million contracts saga, new questions have been raised.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Skills Minister Chris Steel and the CIT board scrambled at the end of last week to distance themselves from the latest $4.99 million contract awarded to "complexity and systems thinker" Patrick Hollingworth.
The message seemed to be: "this whole thing is a disaster, but it wasn't our fault".
Of course they would want to distance themselves from such extravagant spending that has appalled Canberrans. But not so fast. They too have questions to answer.
Such as, how did a nearly $5 million contract bypass the CIT board? What are they there for if not to scrutinise that kind of spending?
How was the Skills Minister not aware of the latest contract until only two weeks ago, especially after he said he had repeatedly raised concerns about prior contracts?
What is the role of the government's procurement board? If the board was not entirely satisfied with the contracts why did they not intervene further to stop this kind of cavalier spending from the public purse? If they did not have the powers to intervene, why not?
And what assurances did Chief Minister Andrew Barr receive back in 2019 before he responded to a member of the public in support of CIT's program of transformation?
So many questions. And Canberrans deserve answers, given their rightful expectation their money will be spent on services and causes that help to further the public good.
This whole sorry saga has come to light as community groups make their applications to receive funding in the upcoming August budget. Groups have asked for money to support more refugee families, for more community housing properties and for greater funding for frontline domestic violence and sexual assault crisis support services.
While these groups beg and plead for government funding, nearly $5 million has been awarded by a training institute for consulting with incredibly unclear deliverables.
And let's put that money into further context. Last week, The Canberra Times reported that the ACT government has not yet committed to a permanent gynaecological cancer surgery unit in the territory despite lobbying efforts from doctors. This service would cost only a fraction of the value of the CIT contracts.
Even if the existence of such an obviously better cause might have escaped the chief executive, if they were paying more attention you would hope the experienced heads on the CIT board might have this kind of need in mind.
Mr Steel was furious about the actions of the board when speaking to The Canberra Times on Friday.
But when asked about his own part in this saga, Mr Steel was adamant he did all he could within his powers. He said he had repeatedly told the board that contracts with Mr Hollingworth, which he was warned about in March 2021, did not meet community expectations.
THE STORY SO FAR:
But is this really enough?
Every single approach to market and contract awarded is posted on the ACT government's tenders website. Any member of the public is able to view this list and is able to get notifications about when new tenders are posted and when contracts are signed.
Surely a staff member from the minister's office could be checking this list weekly, if not more, and noting when something like this is in an area of ministerial responsibility?
So far over five years, CIT has paid more than $4.5 million to the "complexity and systems thinker".
Some of the work conducted by Mr Hollingworth has included training, mentoring, delivering workshops and equipping staff with the skills to adapt to the future.
That sounds awfully familiar to another profession. But teachers at CIT would be lucky to even earn $4.5 million across a lifetime.
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.