Page 2631 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and the Land Development Agency dealt with inquiries about land use and other matters from prospective bidders in the lead-up to the auction.
MR CORBELL: I thank Mr Gentleman for the question and I am pleased to give some further advice and information to the Assembly on this issue. A number of questions asked yesterday referred to a story that was run on WIN Television the previous night. The questions have taken points out of context and, given the significance of the issues raised, it is very important that they are clarified. The WIN reporter introduced the segment with the following question:
Just how much information did Austexx have prior to the auction of the EpiCentre site? That’s the question being asked by Canberra developer, Terry Snow, who believes documents released as part of the Planning and Environment Committee, show it to be considerable.
Mr Speaker, I would like to go through this process in some detail on the basis of what Mr Snow raised on WIN TV on Wednesday night. In response to the reporter’s comment that “Documents show Austexx had already drawn up site plans, and arranged a pre-application meeting to discuss uses on the site, a process that Terry Snow says is inappropriate during a public auction process,” Mr Snow responded that “All the other bidders weren’t notified with the information and site drawings until 17 November, one month later”.
Mr Speaker, I would like to address the following points. The documents referred to, including the site plan, are not ACT government documents. They are Austexx documents, not documents issued by the LDA or ACTPLA. They were commercial-in-confidence until their release following a request by the planning and environment committee. The documents show that Austexx commissioned a company called Orion Communications to prepare site plan drawings. The Austexx fax note of 27 September clearly states this.
It is not unreasonable that bidding companies would proceed to look at the site that they are thinking about buying and to see whether what they want to build will actually fit on the site. This is part of a due diligence process, as I have indicated to members earlier. The so-called site plans were commissioned by Austexx based on information that was available to all interested parties. The location of the site was known and the dimensions of the site were known. It is no state secret where the corner of Newcastle Street and Canberra Avenue is. As I said, it would not be unreasonable to expect prospective bidders to map out the site to see if their proposed development would actually fit onto that site. They did not have to wait until 17 November to know where the site was and to do an indicative site drawing.
In fact, Mr Snow’s company also undertook due diligence and asked ACTPLA very specific questions about car parking relating to what they considered a potential development on the site. On 1 December 2005, two weeks before the auction, Mr Tom Snow emailed ACTPLA and asked the following questions:
We are considering the purchase of Block 8 Section 48 Fyshwick from the LDA, and are considering land uses for this block. Of critical importance in determining these land uses are the parking provision requirements.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .