Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2017 Week 12 Hansard (Tuesday, 24 October 2017) . . Page.. 4224 ..
engaged actively in the networks and services support available here in the ACT and is held in very high regard, particularly in the United States.
Trade unions—influence on government
MR WALL: My question is to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, on 21 July this year the Canberra Times reported on a letter from Unions ACT to all ACT Labor MLAs. This letter requested that Labor MLAs “inform Unions ACT as soon as possible whether you have attended, or intend to participate in, any meetings with, or events or forums organised or sponsored by, the Master Builders Association”. Chief Minister, no Labor Party MLAs attended the MBA annual awards dinner on 19 October. Did the Labor Party boycott the MBA annual awards dinner as a result of the Unions ACT letter?
MR BARR: I do not believe so, no.
Mr Hanson: You don’t believe so?
MR WALL: The Chief Minister seems rather uncertain as to what the actions were. Chief Minister, are Labor MLAs required to seek the approval of Unions ACT before they meet with the MBA or attend any of their events?
MR BARR: No.
MR COE: Chief Minister, why do we have a situation where Labor ministers or MLAs will not meet with the greyhound racing industry, ClubsACT and now the MBA?
MR BARR: We do not have that situation, Madam Speaker.
Land—section 72, Dickson
MRS JONES: My question is to the Minister for Planning and Land Management. On 23 October 2017 the government announced plans to develop section 72 in Dickson as Common Ground housing. There was a land swap deal between the LDA and the CFMEU involving the CFMEU headquarters in Rosevear Place. The government paid the CFMEU $3.9 million in 2014 and has allowed the CFMEU to use the site rent free for three years. The CFMEU was to pay $3.2 million for the neighbouring car park. Minister, why did the government agree to pay $3.9 million in late 2014 to the CFMEU when it did not use the site until late 2017?
MR GENTLEMAN: I thank Mrs Jones for her question; it is an important one. The government has already provided a significant amount of documentation in relation to this transaction as part of an Assembly motion. My previous response in the Assembly and the subsequent release of information in responding to the Assembly resolution provided detailed information on the strategic considerations that guided the negotiations and purchases of the sites in Dickson. I refer members to that detailed information, which, of course, included an explanation, that is, because a development was already proposed for another car park site at Dickson, block 21 section 30.