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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (10 May) . . Page.. 1406 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

The downstream effect of all this is that it would also deter other businesses from dealing with any ACT government-not just us but a future Labor government, an unlikely event, or a future coalition government-if they knew their business would be put at risk by this sort of irresponsible and unwarranted demand. Mr Speaker, I urge all members to seriously consider whether Mr Stanhope has the best interests of the ACT at heart in his request. I doubt it.

MR CORBELL (5.16): Mr Speaker, we heard in the debate earlier today comments by the Attorney-General, Mr Humphries, about what, in his words, had changed in the Labor Party, which in opposition is demanding documents and requesting that the Assembly support our demand, when we took what he alleged was a somewhat different view in government. My colleague Mr Berry and my leader, Mr Stanhope, pointed out, but I reiterate it to stress the point to members, that what is fundamentally different is that the government's track record on deals-secret, open or regardless-is absolutely appalling.

Mr Speaker, my first close involvement with these types of arrangements came with the Hall/Kinlyside land deal. The only term I can use to describe that deal is "cowboyish". That deal, for me, epitomised the whole style of this government. That deal showed that this government was prepared to give away land worth millions of dollars to the territory through an exclusive deal, with no open tender process, no accountability process and no public process whatsoever. The government was prepared to completely change the planning framework for the ACT and yet enter into the deal before it had even managed to achieve that. Then it came to this place and insisted that it had done nothing wrong.

It took FOI requests, public hearings, motions in this Assembly, as well as questions through the Estimates Committee, before we could get to the bottom of it. It took months to get to the bottom of it. In all that time I remember the government saying that Mr Whitcombe, the individual involved in the deal with the government, brought three leases and put them on the Chief Minister's table. We prodded and probed, we asked and we requested, and we demanded. And eventually what was revealed? The Government did not have those three pieces of paper. Its whole justification for the deal was a complete farce. The deal was completely shonky.

That is exactly why today we are proposing this motion. This government has an appalling track record. Hall/Kinlyside confirms it for me, without having to go on to all of those other blunders and disasters like Bruce Stadium, the Feel the Power campaign and many others.

Mr Kaine: The futsal slab.

MR CORBELL: My colleague Mr Kaine mentions the futsal slab. Indeed, Mr Kaine. However, the purpose of this motion today is to obtain that information the government has so far refused to provide. This is exactly the information that Mr Stanhope asked the Chief Minister to provide in question time several weeks ago and which she said she would provide but has not provided. Again, it reminds me of Hall/Kinlyside. We were told, "We have done nothing wrong. We will show you everything." Yet what did we have to do? We had FOI requests, public hearings, questions on notice and motions in the Assembly. And here we are doing it all over again.

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