Page 476 - Week 02 - Thursday, 14 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The terms of reference, I believe, Madam Speaker, are important because at least one point, and that is the third point - "given staff and residents ample opportunity to be involved in decision making processes" - is the subject of one of the current complaints from residents in respect of the behaviour of the Ainslie Village Ltd board. It is one of the current complaints, not just a complaint that was current 12 months after its inception.
Two months after this commitment and terms of reference were drawn up, the Government changed and Mr Connolly replaced Mr Collaery as the relevant Minister.
Mr Lamont: Mr who?
MR CORNWELL: Mr Connolly replaced Mr Collaery as the relevant Minister, Mr Lamont. Mr Connolly twice confirmed that the review would go ahead.
Mr De Domenico: How many times?
MR CORNWELL: Twice. The cock did not crow three times, only twice. However, in a letter of 3 September to a resident, Mr Connolly made changes to the terms of reference. These were referred to, I say in fairness, by the Minister as minor, although this is disputed by others. I want to make it clear that I make no judgment upon how significant the changes were, whether they were major or minor, because other developments soon rendered such nuances quite irrelevant.
Following an appearance before the Assembly's Estimates Committee in September 1991 by Mr Connolly, who is nodding agreement, where again there was no implication that the review would not proceed, nothing more was heard until January 1992, when information became available that the review had been cancelled - despite, I remind the Assembly, two written undertakings that it would go ahead.
Mr Connolly: Information became available because there was a letter saying that.
MR CORNWELL: You will have your chance, Mr Connolly, I have no doubt. Instead of the detailed review with specific, even if amended, terms of reference, Mr Connolly proposed, in January 1992 or thereabouts, to reduce this independent inquiry to a SAAP service review which was to be conducted later in 1992. Effectively, this was an internal review. One could almost say that it was Caesar to Caesar.
Mr Connolly's reasons for cancelling the very detailed independent review are frankly unknown, as far as I am concerned; but the genesis for originally conducting this review still remains. Indeed, if anything, the reasons have been reinforced by more recent events. Prime among these more recent events is the formation of a 100-member Independent Residents Association and supporters - formed, these people claim, because of a lack of confidence in the directors and management of Ainslie Village Ltd.
This lack of confidence is reflected in allegations about personalised number plates for Ainslie Village Ltd company vehicles. AVL-111 and AVL-222 were mentioned, and that led me to place a question on the notice paper - one of the two questions that apparently could not be answered by the Minister for Housing and Community Services, as I explained earlier. This lack of confidence is also
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .