[LINK] Off Topic - Economic stimulus

Stephen Wilson swilson at lockstep.com.au
Thu Aug 12 17:19:59 AEST 2010

Robin Whittle wrote:
> I am sure there were some significant benefits for schools - but not
> as much as if there was more consultation.  
The government had to balance the ideal outcome for school 
infrastructure which might have come from detailed consultation versus 
the need to stimulate the building sector quickly.  I think it's an 
amazing result under the circumstances.  The Orgil review points to a 
98% satisfaction rating.  It's a classic case of not letting the perfect 
be the enemy of the good.
> Generally ... 
Actually you're "generalising"!
> ... open-space has been lost ... 
In how many cases?  Often the BER project was a re-build and improvement 
of existing structures with no change to open space.
> ... and the result is a permanent building ... 
Yes indeed.  Would any one still prefer demountables?
> ... perhaps not well planned ... 
Why the supposition?
> ... not well constructed ... 
That's an unqualified statement that the buildings weren't good.  I 
don't believe Orgil found general problems with quality.
> ... which cost too much ... 
 From who's perspective? From the school's perspective the cost was 
zero.  Quite the opposite of "too much".  I'm not being facetious; the 
BER balanced the needs of schools for improved infrastructure (without 
pretending to deliver ideal infrastructure) with the needs for fast 
economic stimulus.
> ... sitting there for decades.
Not a bad thing if you wanted that school hall.

But if the quality is as bad as you fear, I guess they won't be there 
for decades after all.

Steve Wilson.

More information about the Link mailing list