❓ Question regarding the expenditure of $156,002 on stage and infrastructure for the Big Aussie Barbeque during the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. The answer details the event's organisation under tight time constraints and explains why direct tenders weren't called for specific goods and services.
AnsweredQoN 7591Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the $156,002 for the stage and infrastructure for the Big Aussie Barbeque that occurred during the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, and I ask:
(a) what specific goods and services were acquired by the payment of the amount of $156,002;
(b) were tenders called for the provision of these goods and services, and if yes:
(i) when were tenders issued;
(ii) who were the successful tenderers;
(iii) how much did each successful tenderer receive; and
(iv) who were the unsuccessful tenderers; and
(c) if no to (b), why were tenders not called; and
(d) which individual and organisations received payments, and how much did each receive?
(a) what specific goods and services were acquired by the payment of the amount of $156,002;
(b) were tenders called for the provision of these goods and services, and if yes:
(i) when were tenders issued;
(ii) who were the successful tenderers;
(iii) how much did each successful tenderer receive; and
(iv) who were the unsuccessful tenderers; and
(c) if no to (b), why were tenders not called; and
(d) which individual and organisations received payments, and how much did each receive?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
1 May 2012
Response time
35 days
Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises:
a) The Big Aussie Barbecue was organised as part of the Royal Visit that coincided with the attendance by Her Majesty The Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in October 2011. Advice that the event would proceed was not received until late September and a public announcement was not made by Buckingham Palace until three weeks before the event. All planning until that point had to proceed on the basis that the event may not go ahead. Given the extremely short time available to organise the event and the confidentiality requirements a Request for Tender (RFT) document was developed to secure the services of an event organiser. An invitation to tender was sent to a small group of four established event organisers on 8 September 2011. Each organisation was asked to sign a confidentiality agreement prior to receiving the RFT. It was also clearly stated in the document that the requirements outlined were subject to change as the event may also be cancelled at any stage. The staging and infrastructure costs of $156,002 included (but were not limited to) the supply, delivery, erection and dismantling of the main stage (with roof) and media/audio visual platforms; engineering certificate; telehandling; carpet and the front of house marquee.
b)(i-iv) No, tenders were not called specifically for the provision of these goods and services. The appointed event manager was responsible for the sub-contracting of required suppliers.
(c) A Request for Tender (RFT) was issued to secure events management services for the barbecue and LuxEvents was appointed as the successful respondent. The provision of required services outlined in the RFT included (but were not limited to) staging, audio visual, security, traffic management, public messaging, crowd control, public amenities, accreditation, entertainment, first aid facilities and media management. The RFT also included the following clause -
The successful Respondent shall be the direct contact with the production suppliers and shall manage the following:
Secure at least two quotes where possible;
Negotiate the requirements and contracting;
Workflow and delivery and load out schedules;
OH&S management and issues;
On-site issue management; and
Final acquittals.
Accordingly, there were no tenders issued for the many subcontracted expenditure components involved in the delivery of the event.
(d) Lux Events subsequently issued the State Government with a series of invoices to recoup its supplier costs and provided relevant supporting documentation to substantiate the charges.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
a) The Big Aussie Barbecue was organised as part of the Royal Visit that coincided with the attendance by Her Majesty The Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in October 2011. Advice that the event would proceed was not received until late September and a public announcement was not made by Buckingham Palace until three weeks before the event. All planning until that point had to proceed on the basis that the event may not go ahead. Given the extremely short time available to organise the event and the confidentiality requirements a Request for Tender (RFT) document was developed to secure the services of an event organiser. An invitation to tender was sent to a small group of four established event organisers on 8 September 2011. Each organisation was asked to sign a confidentiality agreement prior to receiving the RFT. It was also clearly stated in the document that the requirements outlined were subject to change as the event may also be cancelled at any stage. The staging and infrastructure costs of $156,002 included (but were not limited to) the supply, delivery, erection and dismantling of the main stage (with roof) and media/audio visual platforms; engineering certificate; telehandling; carpet and the front of house marquee.
b)(i-iv) No, tenders were not called specifically for the provision of these goods and services. The appointed event manager was responsible for the sub-contracting of required suppliers.
(c) A Request for Tender (RFT) was issued to secure events management services for the barbecue and LuxEvents was appointed as the successful respondent. The provision of required services outlined in the RFT included (but were not limited to) staging, audio visual, security, traffic management, public messaging, crowd control, public amenities, accreditation, entertainment, first aid facilities and media management. The RFT also included the following clause -
The successful Respondent shall be the direct contact with the production suppliers and shall manage the following:
Secure at least two quotes where possible;
Negotiate the requirements and contracting;
Workflow and delivery and load out schedules;
OH&S management and issues;
On-site issue management; and
Final acquittals.
Accordingly, there were no tenders issued for the many subcontracted expenditure components involved in the delivery of the event.
(d) Lux Events subsequently issued the State Government with a series of invoices to recoup its supplier costs and provided relevant supporting documentation to substantiate the charges.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.