Page 1437 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 9 May 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the process. There is no section which says that they need to rely on formal independent valuations. There is no section that provides the boards of the authority and the agency with information prior to acquisitions. And there is no section that documents the reasons and rationale for the price paid for acquisitions.
These go to the very heart of transparency and public confidence, and none of these measures are included in the bill. They very easily could have been included in the bill. If this government actually was responding to the many issues that were documented in the Auditor-General’s report, surely it would have included some of these in legislation.
Madam Speaker, the potential for fraudulent and corrupt behaviour in this area remains high, while the assurance of transparency and accountability remains low. The wording of the bill provides that the City Renewal Authority may create an audit and risk committee, not that it must. Considering the issues surrounding the Land Development Agency, the establishment of such a committee should be essential. It should be a legislative requirement.
This bill should be filled with legislative procedures, requirements, checks and balances, but this is simply not the case. This bill is not a fix. It is simply a rebranding of the Land Development Agency into two problems that will be repackaged for the future. Why replace the LDA with two similarly opaque entities? What actions is the government taking to ensure that the CRA and SLA conduct their business openly, instead of behind closed doors, where backroom deals are rife?
These entities should have the highest requirements for transparency, yet this legislation does nothing to put this in place. There are no provisions relating to consultation requirements. Where is the community building and engagement? We have seen the impact on communities where meaningful consultation has not been a priority. You only have to look at the petitions presented today or those being presented later in the week to understand that community engagement is vital. Again, we are seeing the current government put their own interests ahead of those of the community’s.
Some of these provisions in the bill lower notification requirements, thus limiting the scrutiny of the two bodies. There are significantly more provisions for the City Renewal Authority than for the Suburban Land Agency. Part 3 of the bill relating to the Suburban Land Agency does not even contain provisions regarding the establishment of committees, nor others relating to the good conduct of board members.
A genuine attempt to address the issues surrounding integrity and transparency would include board members publicly declaring any conflicts of interests. Where in the bill has the government responded to the myriad of problems uncovered in the investigations into the Land Development Agency?
There are major inconsistencies in the reporting and oversight requirements between the CRA and the SLA. Why is a ministerial statement of expectations only required of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video