Question On Notice No. 303 asked in the Legislative Council on 12 October 2021 by Hon Dr Steve Thomas
Question Directed to the: Minister for Mental Health representing the Minister for Finance
Parliament: 41 Session: 1
Question
I refer to the construction of hard surfaces for sporting courts for schools by the company Earthmac in schools in Williams, Donnybrook and Manjimup, and I ask:
(a) was the company Earthmac paid for the work at all three sites;
(b) if no to (a), which sites were not paid for and why;
(c) what testing was done on any of the contract sites including those not paid for, and please provide the results of all of that testing;
(d) what attempts has the Government made to resolve any outstanding accounts; and
(e) is the Minister confident that procedural fairness has been acheived in the delivery and payment of this contract?
Answered on 17 November 2021
The Department of Finance advises:
a-b) Earthmac has been paid in accordance with its entitlements. Earthmac was paid in full for the work it completed properly on the Donnybrook and Manjimup High Schools. Earthmac could not properly complete the work at Williams Primary School, and therefore it was not paid, except for some ancillary costs.
c) Following complaints from Williams Primary School regarding the quality of the work, an independent consultant engineer undertook an additional inspection of Earthmac’s resurfacing of the quadrangle court area and tennis court in February 2021. The engineer reported several serious defects in the work, including cracking, spalling, an uneven surface and poor drainage. In March 2021, a resurfacing contractor undertook core sampling, which revealed substandard asphalt thicknesses in several locations across the quadrangle surface.
d) The Department of Finance has met and corresponded with Earthmac on multiple occasions to resolve the disputed claims. The Department has obtained independent assessments of the quality of work and has provided Earthmac with the opportunity to rectify the defects.
e) It is evident based on the information presented to me that the Department has provided procedural fairness to the contractor. The Department obtained independent assessments where it appeared the work did not meet requirements, it afforded the contractor the opportunity to both comment on those assessments and rectify the defects in the work, and it made decisions on the basis of the evidence available.