Chapter 4 Developments at Robertson Barracks, Northern Territory
4.1
The following developments at a total estimated out-turn cost of $72.126
million (excluding GST) are proposed to be undertaken at the Robertson Barracks
Army Base in Darwin, Northern Territory:
n Robertson Barracks
Redevelopment (estimated $30.198m);
n Robertson Replacement
Tank Facilities, including minor works at Mount Bundy Training Area (estimated
$6.715m); and
n Hardened and Networked
Army (estimated $35.213m.)
4.2
The proposal was originally referred to the Parliamentary Standing
Committee on Public Works (PWC) of the 41st Parliament on 21 June 2007. The inquiry lapsed with the dissolution of the 41st Parliament on
17 October 2007. The proposal was referred to the PWC of the 42nd Parliament
for inquiry on 13 March 2008.
Conduct of the inquiry
4.3
The inquiry was initially advertised in the Northern Territory News
on 30 June 2007 and in The Australian on 4 July 2007. The inquiry was readvertised in the Northern Territory News on 29 March 2008. The Committee received 13 submissions and two supplementary submissions, including a
confidential supplementary submission regarding the project costs. A list of
submissions can be found at Appendix A.
4.4
The Committee undertook a site inspection, in-camera hearing and public
hearing (including a community statement session) on 16 April 2008 in Darwin. A list of witnesses can be found at Appendix B.
4.5
The transcript of the public hearing as well as all submissions to the
inquiry are available on the Committee’s website[1]. Plans for the proposed
works are detailed in Submission 1, Department of Defence (Defence) also
available on the Committee’s website.
Need for works
4.6
The Committee was advised that the proposed works support the operations
of units based at Robertson Barracks and will:
n rectify deficiencies
in working accommodation as part of the Robertson Barracks Redevelopment;
n provide facilities to
support the operation and maintenance of new tank capability as part of the
Robertson Replacement Tank Facilities; and
n provide the required
facilities to support the Army’s Hardened and Networked Army (HNA) initiative as
outlined in Chapter 2 of this report.[2]
4.7
In assessing existing facilities, the Committee finds that there is need
for the proposed redevelopment at Robertson Barracks and the Robertson
Replacement Tank Facilities.
4.8
Further, and as stated previously in the report, the Committee supports
the HNA initiative as part of the Army’s response enhancing the nation’s
defensive capabilities in response to developments in the global security
situation. The Committee finds that there is need for the proposed works to
support this initiative at Robertson Barracks.
Scope of works
4.9
The proposed scope of works is detailed in Submission 1, Department of
Defence.[3] In short, the works propose
the following:
n Robertson Barracks
Redevelopment: expansion of existing office and operational facilities to
support the 1st Combat Signal Regiment, 1st Combat
Service Support Battalion, 1st Troop Emergency Response Squadron
Land Warfare Centre and the Australian Army Band – Darwin comprising office
accommodation, vehicle and equipment storage, teaching and music rehearsal
facilities, additional car parking, civil and services works and alteration to
existing buildings;
n Robertson Replacement
Tank Facilities at various sites within the base: three repair bays, ‘new
vehicle shelter, office, ablutions and hardstand for parking and turning
circles’ and upgrade of the range control tower at the Mount Bundy Training
Area; and
n Hardened and
Networked Army initiative: ablutions, working accommodation and offices,
equipment storage facilities, vehicle hangars and car parking across the base
to service six regiments and battalions and an upgrade of headquarters
buildings for 1st Brigade.[4]
4.10
The Committee has assessed the scope of works and finds them suitable to
provide the facilities necessary to meet the needs of Robertson Barracks and to
implement the HNA initiative.
Cost of works
4.11
The total out-turn cost of this work is scheduled to be $72.126 million
(excluding GST) which includes construction costs, management and design fees and
contingency allowance. Overall net personnel and operating costs are expected
to increase by $1.8m per annum.[5]
4.12
Costs for the three projects separately are:
n Robertson Barracks
Redevelopment - $30.198m (excl GST);
n Robertson Replacement
Tank Facilities - $6.715m (excl GST); and
n Hardened and
Networked Army - $35.213m (excl GST).
4.13
Defence stated that by combining all three projects, efficiencies are
expected in project management and administration costs and through packaging
similar works together.[6]
4.14
The Committee notes the foresight in undertaking the project this way,
particularly as the Robertson Replacement Tank Facilities as a standalone
project falls beneath the PWC threshold for inquiry.
4.15
The Committee received detailed cost plans for the project and held an
in-camera hearing with Defence on the full project costs.
4.16
The Committee is satisfied that the costings for the project are adequate
and that suitable contingency planning is in place (including deferring
non-essential works should there be budget over-runs in any area) to ensure the
overall budget is not compromised.
Project issues
Community impact
4.17
The Committee received twelve submissions and heard from five
individuals at a community statement session held as part of the public hearing
on 16 April 2008 in Darwin. Residents were also represented at the public
hearing by a member of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, Mr Gerry
Wood MLA. The submissions and individuals all raised concerns about the impact
of base-related traffic on local residential roads.[7]
4.18
Concerns include:
n increased traffic
resulting in a reduction in pedestrian safety, particularly at peak hours;
n an increase in
traffic accidents, including one fatality resulting in some residents
redefining property boundaries at some expense as a safety measure;
n antisocial attitudes
of drivers, including littering and inappropriate language towards young women;
and
n general disturbance
of the peace by the volume, speed and noise of through traffic.[8]
4.19
The Committee heard that official military vehicles are banned from
using the roads concerned but the base had no jurisdiction to prevent soldiers
using the roads in their private vehicles. Residents claimed that the majority
of the antisocial behaviour was from young men in uniform in private cars.[9]
4.20
The Committee acknowledges that the concerns of residents are serious.
It also notes that the Robertson Barracks Base Commander, Brigadier Krause,
shares the safety concerns of residents. At the hearing he stated:
There are also the safety aspects for my soldiers coming to
and from work. I believe the situation at the moment is suboptimal for that as
well—the safety not only of my own soldiers but also of the residents, as is
evident through those submissions.[10]
4.21
Some residents objected to the base redevelopment citing concerns that
an increase in personnel will lead to an increase in traffic. However, while base
growth is expected under this proposal, with the relocation of 1 200 personnel of
the 7 RAR Battle Group to South Australia in 2011, there will be no overall
base population increase.[11]
4.22
The Committee heard conflicting evidence and could not determine whether
traffic increases were directly base related or not. While acknowledging the
serious concerns of residents, the Committee does not believe there is
sufficient evidence or justification for a cessation of growth at the base
particularly in light of the significant contribution the Defence Force makes
to the local economy.
4.23
Being local roads, the local council (at present Litchfield Shire[12])
has the responsibility for any upgrades. This Committee has no jurisdiction to
compel action by the council. However, Defence indicated that it is keen for
the matter to be resolved and to work with local residents to this end.
Further, Defence informed the Committee that an offer of funding had been made
in 2007 but no action was taken by the council and subsequently the funding
lapsed.[13]
4.24
Clearly residents are frustrated about a perceived lack of communication
and the seeming ‘fobbing off’[14] of their concerns at
various levels of government. To this end, the Committee is recommending that
Defence engage the relevant local council on this issue and actively inform
residents of these negotiations.
Recommendation 5 |
4.25
|
The Committee recommends that the Department of Defence facilitate
discussions with the relevant local council and local government authorities
to resolve the issue of traffic control in Knuckey Lagoon and actively engage
local residents in this process.
|
Committee comment
4.26
Overall, the Committee is satisfied that this project has merit in terms
of need, scope and cost and it supports the capacity of the Defence Force to
meet the growing needs of the Army.
4.27
Other than the community impact as detailed above, no significant
concerns were raised in the Committee’s examination of the proposed works.
4.28
Therefore, having examined the purpose, need, use, revenue and public
value of the works, the Committee considers that it is expedient that the
proposed works proceed.
Recommendation 6 |
4.29 |
The Committee recommends that the House of Representatives,
pursuant to Section 18 (7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969,
resolve that it is expedient to carry out the following proposed works: Robertson
Barracks Redevelopment, Robertson Replacement Tank Facilities and Hardened
and Networked Army Projects, Darwin, Northern Territory. |