Page 755 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Hedley went on:
I made a full declaration of the purchase and the proposal -
and I will come back to that in a moment -
to develop an office building to the Secretary of the Department at the time. This was consistent with my usual practice -
I will read that again - "my usual practice" -
of advising the Secretary of any changes to my financial interests.
The current Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions is a co-author of a new and seminal criminal fraud text in Australia. The learned authors say in relation to issues such as questions of conflict of interest - my words - in recent days, "To these crimes are added others which are not dealt with or which are covered less comprehensively in standard works. Into this category fall new offences and the like".
In my speech detailing these matters of concern involving Hamib and Mr Hedley, I said very clearly that these issues may not be criminal, they may not be corrupt, but they raise concerns about the perception of open and honest government and insider trading, or words to that effect. Where else in Australia, except in Queensland recently, have we seen revealed dealings of this magnitude and size by senior officials?
The fact is, sadly, that Mr Hedley has added to the Rally's concerns. He now indicates to us that he kept the Government informed of every move he made. At each step he informed the Government that he was moving into, in this case, a block on Northbourne Avenue where two widows were concerned about excessive traffic and noise. As my colleague Mr Moore will tell you, some of the excessive traffic and noise in Northbourne Avenue stems from other developments which were the subject of considerable litigation in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory by concerned residents, deeply concerned about the encroachments of high-rise office blocks in residential areas, and of course Mr Hedley was moving into a residential area of the city at Turner.
What could be more provocative to community groups than for them to know that a very senior official in the Administration was himself a developer in those areas of contention? Is Mr Berry suggesting in his motion that there has been some impropriety or something improper done by the Rally in raising those concerns? Mr Berry will have the chance to answer my question and one hopes that the - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .