Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 11 Hansard (14 December) . . Page.. 3072 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

Mr Speaker, the report considers a number of other topics from which emerge recommendations which warrant consideration. These matters include public notification, processing times and statements of reasons. There are also gratuitous and disturbing comments about post-secondary education of officers. On the basis of no presented evidence, and with a degree of arrogance, a number of prejudicial judgments are made. I found the officers in the area concerned always to be highly professional, both in their knowledge of issues as well as in performing their administrative duties. The board's approach seemed to me to be unprofessional.

Mr Speaker, at paragraph 6.61 of its text the report asks why there have been so many reports and inquiries over the years and why the majority of the findings and recommendations do not appear to have been implemented. In the future others might be asking the same question in respect of this report. The issues raised have been relevant. There are recommendations that might well be adopted; but the omissions, the mistakes and, in particular, the lack of balance and the tone of the report dominate its arguments and combine to overshadow what is constructive and positive.

The issues will not go away. Different sectors of the community will still have varying opinions about the entitlements attached to their lease. I know that some people will still allege corruption. I know that the inquiry did not set out to inquire into the details of allegations of misconduct or unlawful activity. No matter that it scrutinised hundreds of files, examined all senior bureaucrats and found no evidence at all of corruption, some people will still make claims. These claims continue, notwithstanding the comment in the report at paragraph 17.172 that:

... it has no evidence that any politician or public official has acted in a position of conflict of interest or has ever put interest arising from personal or other relationships above that of the community.

In this most planned of cities, a city with a unique leasehold system, there will always be a diversity of views and continual controversy.

Mr Speaker, what will come out of this report? How much attention should be paid to it? There are two names I have not mentioned before - Yowani and Starlight Drive-In. They might give us a clue. At paragraph 2.1 the report acknowledges the draft variations concerning these sites as the immediate trigger for the establishment of the inquiry. They are, then, of considerable importance, or they should have been. In fact, they hardly rate a mention. General issues of concessional leases, lease enforcement and transparency are mentioned as significant difficulties, but what of all the publicity that was generated over those sites? Perhaps the most telling comment is at paragraph 17.79 in respect of Starlight Drive-In. It says:

... there is no evidence of partiality towards the lessee or evidence that the public interest has been ignored during the process.

The simple fact is that, after all the noise and all the allegations, all the fuss and bother, these draft variations will, and should, proceed. I think that says it all.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .