Perth Children's Hospital legal row brews as John Holland claims project completed
abc.net.au/news/2017-04-04/perth-childrens-ho...
abc.net.auPosted Apr 4, 2017, 5:34 AM UTC
2913
abc.net.auBig business being greedy? Whoa, stop the presses.
Although we should probably give them a tax cut! That way it'll be easier for them to funnel their profits through shell companies to avoid paying tax. Which means that will make jobs and growth! Somehow.
11
They're negotiating for contract extensions. This is a normal tactic, and part of day-to-day business once a company reaches a certain level.
It sucks in general, and particularly so that it's for something as essential as a hospital... but hey.
5
I thought that they'd more or less decided that the source of the lead was upstream of the hospital rather than within the hospital. If that really is the case, then I can see why they're saying the project is completed. It's like a someone building a house refusing to pay the builder because the phone line put in by Telstra is crackly.
3
I think John Holland decided that, but the DoH tests the QE2 campus supply and lead was not present.
9
Hasn't it been concluded that John Holland purchased dodgy building materials which is the cause of the various contaminations? (asbestos roof panels, lead in the water pipes).
9
*a John Holland subcontractor. Doesn't make the situation any better but it's entirely possible that a small subcontractor does the procurement for the more smaller and specialised packages. John Holland wouldn't typically do that sort of thing in-house.
2
Yeah it probably was a subcontractor but the appeal of using a builder like John Holland is that they are responsible for the whole build. That includes ensuring quality, and fixing things that aren't done properly.
4
Yes - what i'm saying doesn't necessarily absolve the main contractor of their responsibilities in this instance. But without having any detailed knowledge of the job i can't really comment.
A lot of it depends on the contractual setup. Previously i've seen a "country of origin' requirement on a previous job, where we had to prove manufacture within a list of countries. It was very difficult to find ANY screws made from countries on the list.
2
That would be true if it was the case, but it appears the lead in the water comes from whatever debris is in the pipes that they tried to flush out with water and considered flushing out with ice. If it was upstream of the hospital, John Holland wouldn't have even considered trying to flush the pipes.
My dad (who is in the building industry) told me two months ago that the pipes were the problem and that the government would end up paying to fix it. I might have to convince him to change his name to Cassandra.
6
There are no lead components in the water system for the hospital. None.
1
I never said there was lead in anything the pipes etc are made of. There is apparently building debris visible in the pipes and that is (or at least was) assumed to be the source of the lead.
The water system is presumably fine, it's the crap that is in it that isn't.
4
I'm no apologist for big business but be assured that John holland has been treated very badly in this project and the manner in which the govt has managed the project is appalling. The liberals worked at keeping this quiet before the election knowing that it was a ticking bomb. The lead problem is external to the hospital. The problematic roof tiles were purchased with a certificate from a standards body stating that they were asbestos free. What we haven't heard about is the continual moving target called "plans"
2†
Tender submitted, tender won by John Holland, work started by John Holland, can't meet spec, blame government. Am I missing something or did John Holland see the project as a cash cow with fail safe political excuses?
6
Public perception at its finest..
3
Holland pulls out the 'too big to fail" card in 3..., 2...