Page 4062 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 13 December 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
tender and we were taken to the cleaners. The lack of proper probity checks by the Gungahlin Development Authority in relation to Harrison stage 1 allowed people to bid who should never have been allowed to bid.
The successor to the Gungahlin Development Authority, the Land Development Agency, is roundly criticised in the Auditor-General’s report released yesterday for the very same weaknesses in administration that we saw years ago which this minister has presided over for five years and has done nothing to improve.
The Chief Minister is right: we should be concerned about the reputation of the ACT as a result of this sale. But it is not Mr Seselja’s doing. Mr Seselja did his duty; he did what was right. In the words of Mr Mulcahy’s amendment, he scrutinised the role of ministers and he scrutinised the minister’s agency. He did the right thing.
Mr Seselja believed that the matter was beyond the capacity of an individual member to delve into and that the Auditor-General should ask some questions. Mr Seselja has been accused of all manner of things. Let us look at the terms of the original motion. He has been accused of abusing the processes of the Legislative Assembly and making misleading and untrue claims. As Mr Seselja said, Mr Corbell has not pointed to one misleading claim in the Assembly or in the estimates committee.
Mr Seselja asked a series of questions. He did not say that bidders did not get the same advice from the LDA and ACTPLA. He asked: did all bidders get the same advice? He did not make an assertion. He asked questions because there was enough documentary evidence to raise doubts in people’s minds, not just in Mr Seselja’s mind, but in the minds of all of the members of the opposition, in the minds of members of the cross bench, the community, the chamber of commerce and the property council.
The victims of this failure by Simon Corbell are people who want to invest in this town. He has presided over a range of disasters that have resulted in a flight of capital from this town. When I was the shadow Minister for Planning—Mr Seselja has the same experience—there were people who said, “I would like to invest in this town, but it is too hard. I will go to Coffs Harbour. I will go to Brisbane. I will go to Adelaide. I will go anywhere because it is too hard.”
What does Austexx think about this town? As Mr Stanhope said, they are coming into this town for the first time. They are a prominent company with connections across this country. Their first, and probably only, experience in this town has been one of incompetence because, after five or six lots of correspondence, the planning authority and the planning minister could not tell them what industrial land use policy on that block in Fyshwick actually means. That is a shameful thing—a completely shameful thing.
Ms Porter: Rubbish!
MRS DUNNE: It is not rubbish. Even after six lots of correspondence, they could not tell Austexx what it means. After an inquiry from the Auditor-General, they still cannot tell the Auditor-General what it means. (Time expired.)
Sitting suspended from 12.26 to 2.30 pm.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .