Legislative Assembly Hansard 1985
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Queensland Parliamentary Debates [Hansard] Legislative Assembly THURSDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 1985 Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy Papers 28 Febmary 1985 3473 THURSDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 1985 Mr SPEAKER (Hon. J. H. Warner, Toowoomba South) read prayers and took the chair at 11 a.m. FEES PAID BY CROWN TO PUBLIC RELATIONS AND ADVERTISING AGENCIES Return to Order The following paper was laid on the table— Retum to an Order made by the House on 28 August last, on the motion of Mr Booth, showing all payments made by the Government to public relations agencies or consultants and advertising agencies or consultants during 1983-84, stating the names of the recipients and the amounts received separately. PAPERS The following papers were laid on the table— Proclamations under— Electricity Act Amendment Act 1984 Industrial (Commercial Practices) Act 1984 Orders in Council under— Gas Act 1965-1981 Explosives Act 1952-1981 Mines Regulation Act 1964-1983 Electricity Act 1976-1984 and the Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act 1982-1984 Electricity Act 1976-1984 Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act 1982 District Courts Act 1967-1982 Supreme Court Act of 1921 Art Unions and Amusements Act 1976-1984 Co-operative Housing Societies Act 1985-1974 CoUections Act 1966-1981 Industry and Commerce Training Act 1979-1983 Local Government Act 1936-1983 Regulations under— Main Roads Act 1920-1983 Fire Brigades Act 1964-1984 Clean Air Act 1963-1984 Petroleum Act 1923-1983 Mortgages (Secondary Market) Act 1984 Inspection of Machinery Act 1951-1982 Consumer Affairs Act 1970-1983 Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984 Community Services (Torres Strait) Act 1984 By-laws under the Queensland Performing Arts Tmst Act 1977-1979 3474 28 Febmary 1985 Ministerial Statements Rules under— Coal Mining Act 1925-1981 Coroners Act 1958-1982 Co-operative Housing Societies Act 1958-1974 Balance sheet of the A.N.Z. Executors and Tmstee Company Limited as at 30 September 1984 Report of the National Companies and Securities Commission for the year ended 30 June 1984. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Water Reserve R. 169, Point Vernon Hon. W. H. GLASSON (Gregory—Minister for Lands, Forestry and Police) (11.5 a.m.), by leave: I seek to clarify for this House the situation relating to the leasing to Lower Cost (Homes) Pty Ltd of former water reserve R.169 at Point Vemon, Hervey Bay. This company, which has been developing land in the Hervey Bay area for the past 25 years, was granted a 15-year development lease over the 17.6 ha block at an annual rental of $2,000. Under the terms of the lease, the land had to be developed into not fewer than 154 residential allotments and had to comply with aU requirements of both the Land Administration Commission and the Hervey Bay Town CouncU within 10 years. In addition, not less than 20 per cent of the gross area, or double the normal council development requirement, had to be dedicated as parkland or other public purpose areas, in addition to normal roadworks. On top of this, 20 per cent of the gross sale prices had to be paid by way of commission to the Land Administration Commission. There has been considerable speculation about some devious multimillion dollar hand-out by the Govemment to Lower Cost (Homes) Pty Ltd and its director, Mr E. W. Howard. Originally, it was claimed that the development was against the wishes of the Hervey Bay Town Council. That was quite incorrect, as is shown by a letter from the council to the Land Administration Commission on 20 November 1978 in which it agreed to the development. More recently, within the term of the present council, the land was rezoned for residential A development. It was claimed that the land usually would have been put up for auction or tender by the public. Land developed by the Lands Department is, in the vast majority of cases, sold at public auction. That is not always so in the case of raw or totally undeveloped land. Then it apparently was the tum of the honourable member for Bundaberg (Mr Campbell) to make a few wild guesses as to the cost of development of the blocks and their eventual selling prices. He claimed that it was a $4m land scandal. However, even he apparently got cold feet at his original claim that the developer was to make a $2m clear profit, as claimed on the television program "Today Tonight" early this month. He subsequently cut the claimed profit in half to $lm in later interviews and statements. As my Cabinet colleague and member for the area (Mr Lin Powell) said in the "Maryborough-Hervey Bay Chronicle" on 1 February, there is absolutely nothing underhand, suspicious or wrong with the Govemment's handling of the development. Rather than the company ending up with an excessive windfall profit, way above what is considered normal retums from coastal residential developments, which I understand is between 30 and 35 per cent, its profit from this particular development will end up round 12 per cent on the risk capital involved. Ministerial Statements 28 Febmary 1985 3475 I have three independent valuations, which I will table. They show clearly how false were the figures quoted by the honourable member for Bundaberg. The first independent valuation assessment that I table was provided at my request by Messrs A. J. Booth and Associates, registered valuers (urban and mral) of Southport. Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid the document on the table. That firm carries out valuations from the Queensland/New South Wales border to Caims. It verifies that the Lands Department's retum from the development, on an estimated selling price of $27,000 per block, will be substantially higher than the developer's retum, which was also indicated by the department's original basic costings of the development. It further shows that the Lands Department's commission and the local authority's headworks charges will benefit the public by $8,900 per block. The profit per block for Lower Cost Homes will be in the order of $3,200 or about 12 per cent; or, on the overaU 155 blocks, a net profit of less than $500,000. On the same basis, the Lands Department's commission alone on the overall development will total $837,000. While the company will make round 12 per cent profit per block, the public, throu^ the Lands Department and the Hervey Bay Town Council, will receive about 33 per cent, and 55 per cent will be taken up in development costs. In fact, I am advised by the chairman of the Land Administration Commission that, taking everything into consideration, the net result will be about equal to what it would have retumed the department if it had carried out the development itself In addition, one has to take into account the fact that the department is outlaying no money from its very meagre Land Development Branch's funds, allowing work in other parts of the State to go ahead at the same time. In tabling this valuation, I put on record that the honourable member for Bundaberg estimated the seUing price of the allotments at $30,000, and, according to his expert opinion, the development costs per aUotment would be $10,000. The Booth and Associates valuation places the development costs at $15,800 per block, which included $3,500 for local authority headworks, plus the cost of advertising, promotion, interest charges and selling commissions, which are estimated at a further $2,600, plus the Lands Department's 20 percent commission, making another $5,400 per block. The total cost to the developer is therefore of the order of $23,800. That, of course, leaves the company with a net profit per block of about $3,200, based on the estimated seUing price of $27,000 each. I table also another two development cost estimates, one from Lower Cost (Homes) Pty Ltd's own engineer (Mr M. E. Bellero), and the second from Brisbane consulting engineers Antony Tod and Partners Pty Ltd. Both support the basic development costs of the blocks as substantially more than Mr CampbeU's claimed $10,000 figure—at $14,525 and $15,462 respectively. It will be noted that neither includes marketing costs or the 20 per cent commission ($5,400 a block) to the Lands Department. Prior to entering the House, upon request, I received a further assessment of the development costs by L. J. Hooker Ltd., a company with an undisputed reputation in this State. I will read a section on page 10 of that document— "Current demand is very slow and most sales that have been finalised in recent times are in the price bracket of $14,000 to $20,000. It is our opinion that the subdivision of the entire subject parcel would not be economically viable." I suggest to the honourable member for Bundaberg that in future he check his facts first, before publicly airing his whims of fantasy. 3476 28 Febmary 1985 Ministerial Statements Mr Speaker, a gentleman would feel morally bound to publicly apologise to Lower Cost (Homes) Pty Ltd and Mr Howard on so widely published—but totally unsubstantiated and malicious—claims as have been laid against both. It will be very interesting to see whether the member for Bundaberg falls into that category. Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid on the table the documents referred to. Draft Australian Bill of Rights Hon. N. J. HARPER (Minister for Justice and Attomey-General) (11.13 a.m.), by leave: Firstiy, I draw it to the attention of the House that the Australian Bill of Rights, which was prepared by the present Federal Government prior to the last Federal election but not released, has now been made available under the Freedom of Information Act, and I am taking steps Mr R.