Page 2144 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 2 August 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Wall referred to some comments made by Mr Stanhope and his concerns about what is going on inside the Labor Party. And it is that sort of attitude within the Labor Party, I think, that has led to what we are seeing being played out in the public perception.
Mr Tony Powell, the NCDC boss from 1974 to 1985, recently said at a forum with regard to development at Lake Burley Griffin that the Barr government was prone to corruption of due process in the administration of land and property development. This is not somebody who is speaking on behalf of the Liberal Party. He has not got a political point to make. This is somebody who ran the NCDC. This is somebody who understands how this sort of business should be conducted and is looking at the way the Barr government is dealing particularly on a range of land deals and the insider deals that seem to be happening and is raising serious concerns about that corruption.
As I said, Mr Rattenbury has come forward and acknowledged that there are significant concerns in the community. It was unclear in question time today whether he would actually be taking any action to refer those matters to appropriate authorities, be it the Ombudsman or the Auditor-General or perhaps the police. He is shaking his head that he has not. But what he has done is call for an integrity commission. One could be a little cynical and wonder why that has happened at the end of the term of government, not at the beginning of the term of government, for Mr Rattenbury.
Regardless of the integrity measures that are put in place—and I agree there need to be increased integrity measures—I would argue obviously that a change of government is the only response that ultimately will clean away the smell; regardless of who is in government, whether the Labor Party is re-elected or whether we do come to power, there is a need for better integrity measures around this government. I will be bringing forward a motion tomorrow where we can extend that debate about what the response might be.
Some of the specific issues that are being investigated—and again I will not go into too much detail on them as they have been well litigated in this place and in the media—include the lease variation charge that was signed by Mr Barr, $7 million of community benefit. There are serious questions about where that money has gone. The matter is being investigated by the AFP. The matter is before the courts. Mr Lamont has been issuing subpoenas with regard to that matter. It is very murky.
There are issues being investigated by the Auditor-General, as I understand, with regard to the Land Development Agency, particularly relating to a block of land at Glebe Park and the valuation of that block of land. That, again, has been litigated in the media and in this place. But there are significant issues of concern sufficient that the Auditor-General is investigating those.
This has led to organisations like the Canberra Times writing editorials titled “Government by Cronyism”, quotes from small business organisations about living in the crony capital, the Canberra Times again talking about the smell between the government and the unions over their deal, the concern that the Chief Minister seems to have a “familiarity with power not wholly admirable or indeed desirable”. There
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video