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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4325 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

There is considerable evidence within these papers, which have all been gained under FOI, that suggests that, having had the lease for only two years, Lend Lease is seeking to develop the lease - in other words, to get a change of lease purpose. The advantage to Lend Lease was not to have a car park for a car park's sake but rather to use incremental development - this is what has been causing problems in planning in Canberra for some time - in order to develop a site. Is that in the best interests of Canberra? Is it in the best interests of the taxpayers? Is it in the best interests of the community? Or would it be in the better interests of the community to put such sites out for tender? This is what these papers are referring to, Mr Speaker. This is what is illustrated in these papers. It is illustrated most clearly when all the papers are read.

Mr Speaker, you have read these papers. I do not expect you to make a comment, because that is not your role; but what I am suggesting to this Assembly is that reading these papers in their entirety gives a very good insight into the process by which the Canberra community winds up being dudded by this sort of development. That is not a comment on Lend Lease. I do not have a problem - - -

Ms McRae: Is it a comment in the papers? Is it in the papers?

MR MOORE: You will get your turn.

Ms McRae: It is your interpretation. It is not in the papers.

MR MOORE: I do not have a problem with Lend Lease seeing what action they can take in order to further their profits, to enhance their own business, to develop their own site. That is their prerogative; that is what they are in business for. But we have an important role to ensure the best possible outcomes for the people of Canberra, and the best possible outcomes for the people of Canberra are illustrated in these documents as I read them. Ms McRae properly interjected, "This is your perception of things". Of course it is my perception of what is in the papers. Ms McRae may have a different perception. Let these papers get into the open public and let people get their own perception of what is in them.

Mr Speaker, I believe that these papers illustrate that the best way we can deal with leases in this sort of situation is to ensure that in a very public process and a very open process they go for auction. Considerable criticism has been levelled at the closed processes that have operated on many occasions in our leasehold system. For example, in Manuka there has been criticism about the process not being open enough. We should ensure that people have a reasonable chance to bid for such pieces of land. Otherwise, we effectively create town centre or district centre monopolies - something which I believe to be entirely undesirable. Mr Speaker, I believe that the most appropriate way to deal with this is to ensure that an open government and an open system make these papers available.

These papers were gathered under FOI. Indeed, they went through a whole process. In question time I asked the Chief Minister a question about Lend Lease replacing equipment and upgrading the car parking area at an approximate cost of $318,000.

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