HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-10-15 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Personal Explanation

MEMBER'S REMARKS

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (15:12): I seek leave to make a personal explanation.

Leave granted.

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: I seek leave to make a personal explanation because I believe that I have been misrepresented. While I am reluctant to make a personal explanation without the documents in front of me, given the comments were made in today's question time, I will give the house my personal explanation to the best of my memory.

During question time, the Minister for Infrastructure, in response to a question, read a letter I wrote as the minister for environment and heritage (I suspect in my role as the minister for heritage) to the then member, Steve Condous. It was in relation to the Chapley development and the site at Glenside. The Chapleys, as is well known to the house, have a property with an adjoining boundary with the Glenside property.

Through representations—I can only assume through Mr Condous, given that I wrote to him, but certainly through my department and to me—the Chapley group sought permission to buy a sliver of land along that adjoining boundary because there was a heritage-listed wall that was continually being knocked over by its delivery and supply trucks. The trucks were slowly getting bigger, the turning circle of the original development was not big enough and the wall was continually getting damaged and knocked over, incurring expense for them and for the department.

My role was the role as the minister for heritage—the heritage-listed wall. It was actually impossible for me to agree to the sale of the land as minister for heritage because it was under the then minister for health, Dean Brown, which is why the letter was copied to the minister for health, Dean Brown.

I think that the minister's answer in question time today gave the impression that I had given approval for the sale of the land apparently proposed as part of the Chapley redevelopment. I think that is a misrepresentation of the facts. I invite the minister to look at the record and come back and correct the record, if he so wishes, while he has the opportunity.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT