Page 3115 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 22 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
As evidenced in the investigations by the Auditor-General, ignoring the procurement framework led to actions that seriously undermined the integrity of the government and came at great cost to the taxpayer. The contempt that some in the LDA had towards the framework led to the procurement issues surrounding the Glebe Park and West Basin issues, and it has also, seemingly, extended to the rural purchases currently under investigation by the Auditor-General.
By their own admission, the board and management felt comfortable disregarding a notifiable instrument. After that contempt, the only avenue left to ensure compliance in these two new authorities is to enshrine new governance arrangements in the framework of the legislation. These governance measures are fundamental to ensure integrity in acquisitions, and they also must set expectations for each authority.
The Canberra Liberals were the only party to put forward amendments to the City Renewal Authority and Suburban Land Agency Bill to enshrine in legislation the procurement frameworks for these two authorities. The Canberra Liberals were the only party to make a genuine attempt to address the issues that the Auditor-General found. The Canberra Liberals were the only party to endeavour to impart integrity into the new authorities with legislated governance arrangements.
Unfortunately, those opposite and those on the crossbench, or supposedly on the crossbench, disagreed. The new procurement framework is now entirely based on ministerial discretion. Canberrans can have no assurance whatsoever that there is integrity in land acquisitions in the ACT.
As Minister Berry admitted in her statement this morning, there is still no disallowable instrument setting out the thresholds or acquisition requirements. We are two months in—this legislation has been current for two months—and despite the issues that were highlighted by the Auditor-General, despite the fact that the Auditor-General had another live inquiry, there are still no thresholds or acquisition requirements.
The amendment requiring these directions was put forward by the Chief Minister as an alternative to the Canberra Liberals’ amendment legislating the land acquisition framework. The requirement for these directions is not a surprise. The legislation was debated in early May. Why, then, has the government allowed the SLA and the CRA to operate for nearly two months without these directions?
Under the current administrative arrangements, there are two ministers associated with the SLA: the Minister for Housing and Suburban Development and the Minister for Urban Renewal. The Chief Minister is responsible for the CRA. However, under the arrangements, the Treasurer is responsible for directions relating to authorisation thresholds for land acquisitions for both the CRA and the SLA. We have ministerial responsibility for these authorities spanning four portfolios, yet no minister has thought it important enough to actually ensure that there are directions for land acquisitions.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video