Mr BAILEY - 1994-11-22
The Auditor-General's latest report states that a developer's fee of $1.75m was paid to the project developer, Tipperary Developments. Can the minister tell us exactly what this juicy little morsel of $1.75m was for? Why was a developer's fee paid before the development was finished?
Page 284
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I advise the member to refresh his memory from past Parliamentary Records and transcripts of questions he asked officers in PAChearings about the percentages and project fees. The member is being most mischievous.
Mr Bailey: Was the $1.75m audited by the Auditor-General?
Mr MANZIE: Either he is being deliberately mischievous or he has not done his homework properly. What the member is attempting tosuggest is that the Auditor-General should be permitted to audit companies that deal with government.
Mr Bailey: No. What did we get?
Mr MANZIE: I am sorry but that is what you suggested. The bottom line is that there are fees set out, and that has never been a secret. The Auditor-General has set them out.
Mr Bailey: Not a fee, a gift!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MANZIE: The member for Wanguri said clearly and audibly that a gift was given to the developer. That is most inappropriate and suggests that somehow or other I or previous government ministers interfered with the normal processes of a contract ...
Mr Bailey: Under what we have received ...
Members interjecting.
Mr MANZIE: The member suggested that we have taken money from the public purse and given it as a gift. Mr Speaker, I ask that you request him to withdraw ...
Mr Bailey: Come off it!
Mr MANZIE: ... that imputation because not only is it incorrect, it is scurrilous and it reflects on all ...
Mr Bailey: Call a point of order. I am quite happy to discuss it as a point of order.
Mr MANZIE: I ask that he ...
Mr SPEAKER: The minister has not called a point of order ...
Mr MANZIE: I am calling a point of order that the member ...
Mr BAILEY: May I speak to the point of order, Mr Speaker?
Page 285
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker. would you ask the member to take his seat?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have already found that there is no point of order. The Minister for Transport and Works.
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker, the member for Wanguri did claim that the developer was given a gift of $1.75m.
Mr Coulter: $1.75m - that is what he said - a gift.
Mr Bailey: Yes. You tell us ...
Mr MANZIE: How does he substantiate that, Mr Speaker?
Mr Bailey: What did we get?
Mr MANZIE: He knows what we got.
Mr Speaker, I call a formal point of order. The member for Wanguri suggested that, contrary to the normal processes in relation to contractual arrangements, I or other government ministers or the government itself provided the developer with a gift of $1.75m ...
Mr Stirling: Didn't you hear the Speaker's ruling?
Mr MANZIE: That is contrary to standing order 62 because the member's suggestion reflects on me or on other government members. Clearly ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did rule on this point of order. The member made no accusation against any individual, and I believe that there is no point of order. Will the honourable the minister continue with his answer.
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker, I find that most extraordinary. He did say ...
Mr Ede: Do not reflect on the Speaker's ruling.
Mr MANZIE: All payments made to the developer are made in accordance with the contractual arrangements which the member for Wanguri is very clear about. I make it very clear to him that he will be unable to have access to the internal workings of any company which does business with the government because that process does not occur here or anywhere else.
Page 286
Page 284
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I advise the member to refresh his memory from past Parliamentary Records and transcripts of questions he asked officers in PAChearings about the percentages and project fees. The member is being most mischievous.
Mr Bailey: Was the $1.75m audited by the Auditor-General?
Mr MANZIE: Either he is being deliberately mischievous or he has not done his homework properly. What the member is attempting tosuggest is that the Auditor-General should be permitted to audit companies that deal with government.
Mr Bailey: No. What did we get?
Mr MANZIE: I am sorry but that is what you suggested. The bottom line is that there are fees set out, and that has never been a secret. The Auditor-General has set them out.
Mr Bailey: Not a fee, a gift!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MANZIE: The member for Wanguri said clearly and audibly that a gift was given to the developer. That is most inappropriate and suggests that somehow or other I or previous government ministers interfered with the normal processes of a contract ...
Mr Bailey: Under what we have received ...
Members interjecting.
Mr MANZIE: The member suggested that we have taken money from the public purse and given it as a gift. Mr Speaker, I ask that you request him to withdraw ...
Mr Bailey: Come off it!
Mr MANZIE: ... that imputation because not only is it incorrect, it is scurrilous and it reflects on all ...
Mr Bailey: Call a point of order. I am quite happy to discuss it as a point of order.
Mr MANZIE: I ask that he ...
Mr SPEAKER: The minister has not called a point of order ...
Mr MANZIE: I am calling a point of order that the member ...
Mr BAILEY: May I speak to the point of order, Mr Speaker?
Page 285
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker. would you ask the member to take his seat?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have already found that there is no point of order. The Minister for Transport and Works.
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker, the member for Wanguri did claim that the developer was given a gift of $1.75m.
Mr Coulter: $1.75m - that is what he said - a gift.
Mr Bailey: Yes. You tell us ...
Mr MANZIE: How does he substantiate that, Mr Speaker?
Mr Bailey: What did we get?
Mr MANZIE: He knows what we got.
Mr Speaker, I call a formal point of order. The member for Wanguri suggested that, contrary to the normal processes in relation to contractual arrangements, I or other government ministers or the government itself provided the developer with a gift of $1.75m ...
Mr Stirling: Didn't you hear the Speaker's ruling?
Mr MANZIE: That is contrary to standing order 62 because the member's suggestion reflects on me or on other government members. Clearly ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did rule on this point of order. The member made no accusation against any individual, and I believe that there is no point of order. Will the honourable the minister continue with his answer.
Mr MANZIE: Mr Speaker, I find that most extraordinary. He did say ...
Mr Ede: Do not reflect on the Speaker's ruling.
Mr MANZIE: All payments made to the developer are made in accordance with the contractual arrangements which the member for Wanguri is very clear about. I make it very clear to him that he will be unable to have access to the internal workings of any company which does business with the government because that process does not occur here or anywhere else.
Page 286
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016