Page 2200 - Week 07 - Thursday, 27 August 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
so many unanswered questions, there is so much opacity and there are a lot of people who are relying on the justification.
It was a long time ago—and I do not have access to my diary—but, at the same time, there were a lot of people that had very clear recollections of what was going on. The owners of properties have a very clear understanding of the amount of power that was exercised by the Land Development Agency and their agents in the private market over the acquisition of land. I think that that is why it is appropriate that this matter is referred to the Integrity Commission.
With that, I commend the recommendations in this report to, presumably, an incoming government. I think that people take the view, “It is the LDA, it was a long time ago. Most of those people have moved on or they are doing something else and the agencies that have replaced them are doing a lot better job, so we should not worry about it.” Yes; we should worry about it because what happened under the Land Development Agency was dodgy. Quite simply, it was dodgy. The arrangement that they went into in relation to Fairvale in particular was dodgy, the arrangement whereby they paid an invoice was dodgy. Some people would say that there may be corruption involved.
I put on the record, just in case there is any doubt, I think that it was perfectly reasonable for someone who had an interest in buying part of the property of Fairvale to ask, “Could I buy a section of the property?” I think that the outcome was not reasonable. It was not reasonable for the LDA to acquiesce to that. It was not reasonable for the LDA to have this sleight of hand of handing in one lease and issuing two and giving one to one person and the LDA keeping the other one. All those things smack of corruption, and I think that it is time that the Integrity Commission looked at what was really happening in the LDA. (Time expired.)
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (10.51): I extend my thanks to other members of the committee, especially Mrs Dunne as the chair, for the large amount of work on this particular inquiry which started from the Auditor-General’s report No 8 of 2018. I thank all the witnesses who appeared—government officials, owners of various properties, former owners of properties et cetera—and give a huge thankyou to the committee secretary, Dr Brian Lloyd, as always, a powerhouse in terms of workload and research. Thank you so much.
The committee findings were very much collegiate and collaborative for the most part and were consensus findings. For example, the committee found that the LDA did not adhere to established planning policies in its assembly of rural land west of Canberra. The committee found that the LDA did not follow all the tests required et cetera. The committee found issues with the board’s understanding of the legislation. The committee found that the LDA proceeded with acquisitions without the explicit authorisation of cabinet. I am paraphrasing slightly in the interests of time. People will be able to read these findings for themselves.
Finding 5 was:
The Committee finds that the LDA’s approach to the acquisition of Fairvale was highly unusual and contrary to its policy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video