Page 2605 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 10 August 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
As members of this place are aware, ministers do not undertake commercial negotiations for land. We do not receive the valuations during negotiation processes and, rightly, we are not involved in the commercial decisions of the LDA. I was informed of the purchase by the CEO of the LDA. He has assured me and he has assured the Assembly that he did so within his delegation from the LDA board. The LDA board was also formally briefed on the purchase and noted at its September 2015 meeting that the CEO had agreed to purchase the block for $4.18 million including GST, in accordance with authority delegated by them.
The Auditor-General is conducting a performance audit of this purchase. I will say again that l will not pre-empt her findings, and nor should anyone in this place. But let me conclude this morning by reiterating how important the project is to our city to change the way we interact with our lake and enliven our CBD. As the eminent Canadian planner Gordon Harris said on his recent visit to Canberra:
The opportunity for Canberra is to make it simply more liveable.
That is an opportunity we intend to pursue over time with our investment in this project. I commend my amendment to the Assembly.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (11.44): I welcome Mr Coe bringing this motion to the Assembly in relation to the block of land adjacent to Glebe Park. It has been a topic of some public discussion and public speculation, and I think it is worth airing that in this place today. This is an interesting case. The relocation of the Coranderrk Street water control pond is a well-known project. Of itself it is not especially contentious. People recognise that the current water treatment pond in the middle of Parkes Way has its problems. From an engineering point of view it is not delivering what it is supposed to. Frankly, it is a bit stinky on occasions and we need to fix up our water quality issues in the urbanised inner north catchment.
Block 24 section 65 of the city has been identified as an appropriate and the preferred site for a pond, and this is the basis on which it was purchased. That part of it is not the contentious part of the story. It points to a sensible engineering approach, as best I can understand these things. Where it gets to then is the purchase process. I think that is the nub of what Mr Coe is raising today. His motion calls for a large amount of detailed information about this purchase, and that is the essence of it.
The Chief Minister’s amendment has gone some way to providing that information. As a matter of principle, I agree this information should be made available, noting, of course, that there are probably some issues with commercial in-confidence in there somewhere. But the Chief Minister has in his amendment provided the answers to quite a number of the questions that Mr Coe has posed today.
The important part of this story is that the Auditor-General is currently undertaking a performance audit into this transaction in due course. Specifically, the performance audit will consider how the LDA conducted the purchase and whether or not this was in accordance with relevant legislation, policies, procedures and any other requirements. The audit will look into this in an enormous level of detail, as audits are wont to do, and much more thoroughly than we can in this place today. That audit report will come back to the Assembly and will be publicly released.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video