Mr STIRLING - 1994-11-24
Yesterday, the minister said that he would supply information relating to an above-market price for the government's purchase of Douglas Station. What is the reason for the government paying an above-market price for any property? Howmuch is being paid above the market price?
ANSWER
I am very pleased that the member has asked me this question. It will save a little time because I had proposed to provide the information immediately following Question Time which is the appropriate time provided. Nonetheless, I am happy to provide the answer to the member now. I remind members of the question that was asked yesterday:
The government is in the process of purchasing the Douglas pastoral lease which is part-owned by Tipperary Developments Pty Ltd.
Is it a fact that this pastoral property is being purchased for more than the Valuer-General's valuation and, if so, why? Is this a backdoor
means of sorting out some of the government's current difficulties with Tipperary Developments?
Being a little over-enthusiastic - I have another term for it that I will not use in this House - members opposite could not be bothered waiting for an answer. They presumed the answer and decided to rush off to the media about this situation. On ABC Radio at 4 pm yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition said:
The information was provided by the departmental officers to my shadow minister telling him that the property was purchased from
a group which is part-owned by Tipperary Developments for above the Valuer-General's valuation. And this is proceeding at the
current time, at the same time as other negotiations are going on in regards to obligations from Tipperary Developments. Now,
we wanted to see whether there is some sort of off-setting going on.
The member for Nhulunbuy, speaking on ABC Radio, also at 4 pm last ...
Mr Stirling: At 4.30 pm actually.
Mr HATTON: Perhaps at 4.30 pm. It was on the Afternoon Program. My notes state 4 pm, but I will accept that it could have been 4.30 pm.
The member for Nhulunbuy went a little further actually. He repeated the allegation that the government was purchasing the Douglas pastoral lease. The question was asked: 'Was that being done at market rate?' The answer was: 'Yes, that and a bit more'. Allegedly, he was told that by departmental staff. The member then said:
Well, of course, knowing the difficulties that the government has been having in recent times with Tipperary Developments, it is
always interesting, of
Page 325
course, at any time that government should see the need to pay above-market rates for anything.
Members can read through the transcripts, but the allegations are: firstly, that Douglas Station is owned by Tipperary Developments, which is the same company that is the project manager for the State Square project and, in particular, the Parliament House; secondly, that somehow we have paid above the market price; and, thirdly, that we may have paid a little extra on the purchase of Douglas Station as a sweetheart deal so that we could be seen publicly to pay a little less for Parliament House. It is a cute trick. It is the perfect example of the type of conspiracy theory that opposition members run with, but they have a couple of problems.
In relation to the first allegation, we deny that departmental officers told the member for Nhulunbuy what he claims he was told. My staff officer was present at that briefing and took copious notes, and I have spoken to the officer involved in the briefing. Both deny that that was ever said to the member for Nhulunbuy.
Mr Stirling: 'Market price plus a little more' is what he said.
Mr HATTON: That is denied, and it is not shown at all in my officer's notes. The public servant denies that he said what has been alleged.
The opposition's second major problem is that it so happens that Tipperary Developments has no ownership or interest in Douglas Station.
Mr Ede: It is Owston Nominees ...
Mr HATTON: No. Apparently ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Do yourself a favour and settle down for a second, will you?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: On approximately 20 December 1993, I approved the transfer of ownership from Owston Nominees, which was the shelf company going back to Warren Anderson, to total ownership by the Bakri Group. Thus, the property is 100% owned by Indonesian interests.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: I will explain that if you do not mind! The problem is that you suffer from premature political ejaculation. If opposition members had waited for the answer, they would have received it.
Mr Ede: This morning's search ...
Mr HATTON: I have it here. If you will listen, I will tell you.
Page 326
I am advised that, not long after that, the funds changed hands between the lawyers in Sydney. It is true that the title registration has not proceeded. The application is with the Registrar of Companies currently.
Mr Ede: 12 months later?
Mr HATTON: That is right. I am advised that that is longer than normal but not irregular. The only reason is that it involves dealings with foreign banks, foreign companies, lawyers in Sydney and lawyers in Darwin. It is simply an administrative procedure. The total ownership of this property is registered with the Bakri Group.
Mr Ede: Garbage!
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr Bell interjecting.
Mr HATTON: I will provide these documents to members opposite if they would like to have them. They are the company extracts. The 2 companies that own the property are called Branir Pty Ltd - and I have the names of all the owners of that company - and Tovhead Pty Ltd. Both those companies are owned totally by the Bakri Group.
Mr Bell: If they are not on the register, they don't own it, Steve.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Take me up on this when we leave parliament if you dare.
Take it from me, those properties are totally in the beneficial interest. The contracts have been exchanged, the bucks have been paid and the paperwork is being finalised. That is all that is happening. All the negotiations have been with the Indonesian owners of that property. There has been no involvement by Warren Anderson. He happened to sell out as part of sorting out the financial difficulties that he had last year. He sold out of that property and he has had no interest in it this year.
Mr Bell: However, he is still on the title.
Mr HATTON: Go and talk to the Registrar of Companies. He has the documentation in front of him now. Currently, he is carrying out the examination of that in preparation for registering the title. The title registration is proceeding.
Mr Bell: Come on!
Mr HATTON: All I can say is that, if you want to run a conspiracy theory, it is very hard when you talk with the wrong people.
Mr Bell: Particularly when you do not tell the truth.
Page 327
Mr HATTON: The second allegation relates to the price of the property. The property was purchased by the Northern Territory Land Corporation which negotiated the purchase from the Indonesian owners of Douglas Station. The actual price paid for that property was $1.25m. The Valuer-General indicated a value of $1.15m. The difference of $100 000 is well within what is regarded as a reasonable tolerance of 5% or 10% for a negotiated purchase price. It is not abnormal for a government to use the Valuer-General's valuation as a guide within a narrow margin. For example, if it were a compulsory acquisition, the legal costs alone would have gone way beyond that price. Therefore, one is looking at a negotiated price versus compulsory acquisition. One uses the Valuer-General's valuation as a guide and works within a 5% or 10% tolerance margin in negotiating a settlement in a commercial arrangement. That was the price that was settled.
The additional funds provided to the Northern Territory Land Corporation were to assist with surveying, document processing and other matters associated with it. There is nothing abnormal about the price, and we were talking, in fact, to a different group of people. Drop your conspiracy theory on this one and, next time, wait for the answer.
Page 328
ANSWER
I am very pleased that the member has asked me this question. It will save a little time because I had proposed to provide the information immediately following Question Time which is the appropriate time provided. Nonetheless, I am happy to provide the answer to the member now. I remind members of the question that was asked yesterday:
The government is in the process of purchasing the Douglas pastoral lease which is part-owned by Tipperary Developments Pty Ltd.
Is it a fact that this pastoral property is being purchased for more than the Valuer-General's valuation and, if so, why? Is this a backdoor
means of sorting out some of the government's current difficulties with Tipperary Developments?
Being a little over-enthusiastic - I have another term for it that I will not use in this House - members opposite could not be bothered waiting for an answer. They presumed the answer and decided to rush off to the media about this situation. On ABC Radio at 4 pm yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition said:
The information was provided by the departmental officers to my shadow minister telling him that the property was purchased from
a group which is part-owned by Tipperary Developments for above the Valuer-General's valuation. And this is proceeding at the
current time, at the same time as other negotiations are going on in regards to obligations from Tipperary Developments. Now,
we wanted to see whether there is some sort of off-setting going on.
The member for Nhulunbuy, speaking on ABC Radio, also at 4 pm last ...
Mr Stirling: At 4.30 pm actually.
Mr HATTON: Perhaps at 4.30 pm. It was on the Afternoon Program. My notes state 4 pm, but I will accept that it could have been 4.30 pm.
The member for Nhulunbuy went a little further actually. He repeated the allegation that the government was purchasing the Douglas pastoral lease. The question was asked: 'Was that being done at market rate?' The answer was: 'Yes, that and a bit more'. Allegedly, he was told that by departmental staff. The member then said:
Well, of course, knowing the difficulties that the government has been having in recent times with Tipperary Developments, it is
always interesting, of
Page 325
course, at any time that government should see the need to pay above-market rates for anything.
Members can read through the transcripts, but the allegations are: firstly, that Douglas Station is owned by Tipperary Developments, which is the same company that is the project manager for the State Square project and, in particular, the Parliament House; secondly, that somehow we have paid above the market price; and, thirdly, that we may have paid a little extra on the purchase of Douglas Station as a sweetheart deal so that we could be seen publicly to pay a little less for Parliament House. It is a cute trick. It is the perfect example of the type of conspiracy theory that opposition members run with, but they have a couple of problems.
In relation to the first allegation, we deny that departmental officers told the member for Nhulunbuy what he claims he was told. My staff officer was present at that briefing and took copious notes, and I have spoken to the officer involved in the briefing. Both deny that that was ever said to the member for Nhulunbuy.
Mr Stirling: 'Market price plus a little more' is what he said.
Mr HATTON: That is denied, and it is not shown at all in my officer's notes. The public servant denies that he said what has been alleged.
The opposition's second major problem is that it so happens that Tipperary Developments has no ownership or interest in Douglas Station.
Mr Ede: It is Owston Nominees ...
Mr HATTON: No. Apparently ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Do yourself a favour and settle down for a second, will you?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: On approximately 20 December 1993, I approved the transfer of ownership from Owston Nominees, which was the shelf company going back to Warren Anderson, to total ownership by the Bakri Group. Thus, the property is 100% owned by Indonesian interests.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: I will explain that if you do not mind! The problem is that you suffer from premature political ejaculation. If opposition members had waited for the answer, they would have received it.
Mr Ede: This morning's search ...
Mr HATTON: I have it here. If you will listen, I will tell you.
Page 326
I am advised that, not long after that, the funds changed hands between the lawyers in Sydney. It is true that the title registration has not proceeded. The application is with the Registrar of Companies currently.
Mr Ede: 12 months later?
Mr HATTON: That is right. I am advised that that is longer than normal but not irregular. The only reason is that it involves dealings with foreign banks, foreign companies, lawyers in Sydney and lawyers in Darwin. It is simply an administrative procedure. The total ownership of this property is registered with the Bakri Group.
Mr Ede: Garbage!
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr Bell interjecting.
Mr HATTON: I will provide these documents to members opposite if they would like to have them. They are the company extracts. The 2 companies that own the property are called Branir Pty Ltd - and I have the names of all the owners of that company - and Tovhead Pty Ltd. Both those companies are owned totally by the Bakri Group.
Mr Bell: If they are not on the register, they don't own it, Steve.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Take me up on this when we leave parliament if you dare.
Take it from me, those properties are totally in the beneficial interest. The contracts have been exchanged, the bucks have been paid and the paperwork is being finalised. That is all that is happening. All the negotiations have been with the Indonesian owners of that property. There has been no involvement by Warren Anderson. He happened to sell out as part of sorting out the financial difficulties that he had last year. He sold out of that property and he has had no interest in it this year.
Mr Bell: However, he is still on the title.
Mr HATTON: Go and talk to the Registrar of Companies. He has the documentation in front of him now. Currently, he is carrying out the examination of that in preparation for registering the title. The title registration is proceeding.
Mr Bell: Come on!
Mr HATTON: All I can say is that, if you want to run a conspiracy theory, it is very hard when you talk with the wrong people.
Mr Bell: Particularly when you do not tell the truth.
Page 327
Mr HATTON: The second allegation relates to the price of the property. The property was purchased by the Northern Territory Land Corporation which negotiated the purchase from the Indonesian owners of Douglas Station. The actual price paid for that property was $1.25m. The Valuer-General indicated a value of $1.15m. The difference of $100 000 is well within what is regarded as a reasonable tolerance of 5% or 10% for a negotiated purchase price. It is not abnormal for a government to use the Valuer-General's valuation as a guide within a narrow margin. For example, if it were a compulsory acquisition, the legal costs alone would have gone way beyond that price. Therefore, one is looking at a negotiated price versus compulsory acquisition. One uses the Valuer-General's valuation as a guide and works within a 5% or 10% tolerance margin in negotiating a settlement in a commercial arrangement. That was the price that was settled.
The additional funds provided to the Northern Territory Land Corporation were to assist with surveying, document processing and other matters associated with it. There is nothing abnormal about the price, and we were talking, in fact, to a different group of people. Drop your conspiracy theory on this one and, next time, wait for the answer.
Page 328
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016