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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 2538 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Mr Deputy Speaker, in this case it would appear to me that the Treasurer is pointing to $100,000 in public works as the exceptional public benefit. I accept that this report was not available at the time that the direct grant was made. However, if we are coming down to public benefit, we cannot simply state that $100,000 is an exceptional public benefit, particularly when that cost, that benefit, has been subsidised by us. We discounted the value of the land. I know that Mr Humphries claimed something else in this place earlier in the debate, but we have effectively discounted the price of the land to get that public benefit. So who is paying? Not the developer. We are. The Territory is paying. The developer is bringing nothing exceptional to the proposal. As this Government would be aware, there is a strong demand for multi-unit development sites in this city, and I cannot understand why the Government would believe that a direct grant was appropriate in this case when, first, there is a considerable level of demand for multi-unit development sites, and, secondly, the public benefit is a subsidy provided by the Territory to the developer. There were no grounds, Mr Deputy Speaker, for a direct grant.

I was pleased to hear the Treasurer say that he is reviewing the matter of that discount on the market value of the lease. Unfortunately, Mr Deputy Speaker, it would appear that the horse has bolted on this matter. It is yet another case of sloppy, shoddy practice when it comes to direct dealings or exclusive dealings by this Government with developers and it will again cost the Territory a considerable amount of money, money that we could have otherwise used for useful purposes.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: The discussion is concluded.

Clause 1

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (4.39): I move:

Amendment No. 1 is an excellent amendment of the Government.

Ms Tucker: I agree with you.

MR HUMPHRIES: If you agree with me, no more needs to be said.

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