Search filters applied: environment, premier and cabinet, transport AND 2013, 2010, 2006 AND information technology, infrastructure .
Actions for Management of Historic Heritage in National Parks and Reserves
The National Parks and Wildlife Service is spreading its resources too thinly, running the risk that the heritage significance of important assets will eventually be lost. Parliamentary reference - Report number #230 - released 29 May 2013
Actions for Volume Seven 2010 focus on Environment, Climate Change and Water
The report includes comments on his financial audits of NSW Government environment, climate change and water agencies. The audits of these agencies’ financial reports for the year ended 30 June 2010 resulted in one qualified Independent Auditor’s Report. Sydney Water has not recognised assets and liabilities of the Build-Own-Operate schemes in their statement of financial position. The combined profit after tax of the four largest water utilities increas
Actions for Volume Five 2010 focus on Public Financing Enterprises
The report includes comments on NSW Treasury and agencies in the finance and superannuation sectors. The New South Wales public sector superannuation funds’ investments were $42.2 billion at 30 June 2010, up from $38.5 billion in 2009. Investment returns reached 14.5 per cent in 2009-10. This is a significant improvement on the investment returns of up to negative 18.4 per cent at the peak of the global financial crisis in 2008.
Actions for Condition of State Roads
The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) has improved the overall surface condition of State Roads in the last decade. Country road surfaces are now generally much better. Ride quality has improved and cracking has been reduced. The RTA has also achieved a substantial reduction in the number of structurally deficient bridges over the same period. Despite a significant increase in the State’s contribution to maintenance since 1999-2000, the RTA has deferre
Actions for The Cross City Tunnel Project
In our opinion the Government’s ‘no net cost to government’ requirement was a legitimate (but not the only possible) basis for the tunnel bid process. The Government was entitled to decide that tunnel users meet the tunnel costs. Structuring the bid process on the basis of an upfront reimbursement of costs incurred (or to be incurred) by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) was therefore appropriate. In our opinion, however, the Government, Treasury an