FOI reveals a gem of pomposity from the BCITF 1993 Annual Report re the Dawesville Cut project haunted by the now famous Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association (AWUWRA)

Cleaning out the office I found an envelope fallen down the back of somewhere.

In 2012 I had put in an FOI request to the WA Govt Construction Training Fund which evolved out of the Building and Construction Industry Training Fund from the days of Premier Carmen Lawrence and the earlier WA Inc. Readers may have noticed items on the media lately re the activities of the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association – see hearings at the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. Also see many posts at Michael Smith News.com – check out links on right hand side – more information at the Andrew Bolt blog which has reported on the AWU scandal since August 2011.

From page 25 of the BCITF Annual Report 1993 – sometimes the public service get something so exactly right that it brings tears to my eyes.

Nothing here is suggesting that the BCITF did anything wrong.

For those afficionados who may want to read further:

Section 3.6 Dawesville Cut Project at bottom of page 16 and top p17 is worth catching.

3 thoughts on “FOI reveals a gem of pomposity from the BCITF 1993 Annual Report re the Dawesville Cut project haunted by the now famous Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association (AWUWRA)”

  1. Wow, Warwick I suppose this has been passed on Michael Smith who will no doubt pass it onto the police. In this the government thought it was the AWU when it was actually the AWURA which in fact was illegal as it did not have 5 or more members. One has to wonder if any minister in the WA Government knew that this was a scam.

  2. Hi Cementafriend; Warwick’s FOI has been provided to Michael Smith and IMO is the most important documentary evidence as to what monies were actually paid in respect to Dawesville – although unfortunately cheque payees are not available for the 93/94 BCITF recorded ledger payments; Dr John Lourens has a paper which you can get access to at the foot of this post www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/01/the-bcitf-money-paid-to-thiess-at-dawesville-a-scholarly-paper-by-dr-john-lourens-fcpa.html
    titled Reflections on the Thiess funding submission to the BCITF – this was the up front grant application. The BCITF ultimately accepted Option 2. A huge component of that option was software development
    As to what the Hitchen Review thought about the BCITF expenditure on this project (copy available from here www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv41978
    The Dawesville Project involved providing training to a number of plant operators involved
    with the large earthmoving equipment on the Dawesville Cut. As well as on-site training the
    project involved the development of CD ROM computer based training modules which it is
    intended will be marketed to the industry. The Review has concerns about a number of aspects
    of the project including whether the training undertaken was consistent with the application
    approved. On a cost-benefit basis the 278 hours of training (applied to 30 operators, of whom
    only 12 were still employed on the project at the time of final assessment) does not appear to
    represent “value for money”. It is appreciated the proposal also was to develop the “best
    model of the practical implementation of all facets of the reform process in civil operations”.
    However the Review doubts that a responsibility or objective of the BCITF is the above or is
    to “play a major role in influencing training in civil operations throughout Australia and South
    East Asia”.
    Back to my comment – yes, the Dawesville project was a model all right but not one you should follow if you want value or anything else for money keeping in mind that there is a question as to whether any of this went to Wilson’s sham association which didn’t even on Wilson’s testimony provide a service for the first 12 months

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>