Citizen's Right of Reply

CITIZEN'S RIGHT OF REPLY

The PRESIDENT (14:20): I have to advise that I have received a letter from Mr Michael Wohlstadt requesting a right of reply in accordance with the sessional standing order passed by this council on 11 May 2010. In his letter of 17 March 2011, Mr Wohlstadt considers that the Hon. Mr Holloway made comments during the debate on matters of interest on 9 March 2011 and believes they are a personal attack on his reputation.

Following the procedures set out in the sessional standing order, I have given consideration to this matter, and I believe that it complies with the requirements of the sessional standing order. Therefore, I grant the request and direct that Mr Wohlstadt's reply be incorporated in Hansard.

To the Honourable President,

COMMENTS MADE BY THE HON. P HOLLOWAY MLC 9 MARCH 2011

I write in response to comments made about me by the Hon. P. Holloway MLC on 9 March 2011 at 3.21pm.

These comments have detrimentally affected my personal and professional reputation.

I respectfully request that the following response be published in Hansard.

Response to comments

I respond to the following comments made by the Hon. P Holloway:

"The legal action taken by Gawler council, in particular its Chief Planning Officer, Mr Michael Wohlstadt…"

I have not personally and improperly caused legal action to be undertaken against the Hon. P Holloway, who was the Minister for Urban Development and Planning at the time that the Town of Gawler's proceedings were commenced.

This comment is, with respect, incorrect. The elected body of the Council resolved to commence and continue its proceedings on the basis of independent legal advice, and after careful consideration of the interests of its community. My role as an officer of the Council was to implement the Council decisions.

The legal action referred to by the Hon. P Holloway was undertaken by the Council as a corporate body, and was not in any way undertaken by any individual officers of the Council.

"The motivation for this action by the Chief Planner of Gawler council…'

The legal proceedings against the then minister were undertaken pursuant to resolutions of the elected body of the Council after careful consideration and briefings on independent legal advice by legal advisors as requested by the Council. I deny that they were unduly influenced or motivated by me.

"Mr Parnell has been trotting around trying to get councils everywhere to seek judicial review of planning decisions…He is in league with this planner."

Contact with the Hon. M Parnell MLC regarding the Gawler Racecourse DPA was on 9 November 2009, when, again on instructions from the Council, I wrote to him to invite him to the Council's community forum on the Gawler Racecourse DPA. The same invitation was sent to a variety of community leaders, which on advice from the Council, had shown an interest in the Racecourse DPA.

I do not recall receiving a response to this invitation.

The only other occasion where I have had contact with Mr Parnell is when he sent me an e-mail urging the council to attend the Environment, Resources and Development Committee's hearing concerning the Gawler Racecourse DPA. The decision was taken, contrary to Mr Parnell's suggestion, to attend.

Documents obtained by Mr Parnell under the Freedom of Information Act 1991 were supplied to me by an elected member of the Council, not by Mr Parnell. I have never had an opportunity to read them as the Council had already commenced its action in this matter by the time they were given to me.

I deny that Mr Parnell is "in league" with me.

I believe that the use of the term "in league" suggests impropriety on my behalf concerning the legal action undertaken by the Council which, for the reasons given above, is incorrect.

"I understand Mr Wohlstadt also has approached other major property owners and developers in Gawler to support their legal challenge. I will take that up further in a later debate."

This comment, again, implies improper conduct or impropriety on my behalf which I strongly deny. I have not approached any other property owners, major or not.

Any actions I have undertaken in relation to the Gawler Racecourse DPA have been at the direction, or with the authorisation of the elected body of the Council. All of the court documentation and actions bear my name to meet the Court's requirements. This is a consequence of my role as a senior officer of the Council, acting under its direction. I believe that this is a personal attack on me and my reputation which is unfair and unwarranted and my actions were simply those of a public officer acting in accordance with his/her duty.

Yours sincerely,

Michael Wohlstadt MPIA CPP

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!