HANSARD EXTRACT
| Sale of
Currawong |
| 28 February 2007 |
Mr HAYES
(Werriwa) (7.49 p.m.)—Tonight
I rise to address a smear campaign being waged against Unions New
South Wales over the sale of the Currawong property on the western
foreshore of Pittwater. This campaign is being waged by individuals
who have a long track record of campaigning against the union
movement and its objectives to get a fair deal for working
Australians. These issues were raised in this place; therefore I am
going to try to correct the record in this place.
Unions New South Wales’s stated preference was for the unconditional
sale of Currawong, and a position clearly outlined in all of the
relevant documentation was forwarded to interested parties. The
suggestion at the heart of this smear campaign is that Unions New
South Wales accepted an offer of $15 million, an amount that was
supposedly half that of the top price offered. The alleged top offer
of $30 million was conditional on the approval of a development
proposal which included 30 house sites, 30 cabins, a 30-berth marina
and a small commercial precinct development. If this failed to be
approved, the offer price would either be reduced substantially or
the offer would lapse.
Given the nature and location of Currawong on the foreshores of
Pittwater, there is little doubt that a public campaign would have
been waged against any development proposal put forward for the
property. Furthermore, had a development application been lodged
that saw Unions New South Wales benefit either directly or
indirectly, the application and its assessment would have been
highly politicised. On the basis that the offer was conditional,
which was against the stated preference of Unions New South Wales,
the best unconditional offer was accepted. Those who talk about
missing millions conveniently ignore these key facts. By removing
any financial benefit for the union movement based on a development
approval, Unions New South Wales has allowed any proposals for the
future use of the Currawong site to be judged on the nature and
quality of the proposal alone.
In
addition to the alleged ‘missing millions’, allegations have been
made against David Tanevski and the role of Kingsway Capital. The
theory being touted is that Mr Tanevski screened all offers to the
advantage of his business and business associates. Quite frankly,
the facts present a radically different story to that. Mr David
Tanevski was asked to advise Unions New South Wales on the structure
of their sale, given the likelihood that it was going to be a
complex transaction. He was engaged because of his relative
experience in these matters. He was initially asked to advertise the
sale, to field inquiries and to forward information packages
prepared by Unions New South Wales lawyers to interested parties. As
required by the information packages, expressions of interest were
then forwarded to Trust Cox Solicitors, which collated the 15 offers
that were received by the closing date. All negotiations were
conducted by the officers of Unions New South Wales and their legal
representatives.
Given that the allegations put forward in this smear campaign have
been presented with such conviction, it is fascinating that no-one
has yet been able to find any evidence of how it is that Mr
Tanevski’s limited involvement in this matter has done anything
other than to maximise the eventual sale price for Currawong. I find
it somewhat ironic that the most dogged in this debate in the
pursuit of the union movement are those who are now crying loudest
about the allegations of short-changing Unions New South Wales over
the sale of Currawong. Those crying loudest are the same people who
have dedicated themselves to ridding workplaces of unions, to
severely curtailing their capacity to support working Australians
and to silencing them in the political debate.
The Minister for Health and Ageing, who used questions about the
health of Australian workers to bring this campaign before the
parliament, is well known for his objection to unions and his desire
to see unions driven out of society. The motivation of those
involved in this campaign is quite clear: they know that some of the
funds from the sale of Currawong will be dedicated to the campaign
against the Howard government’s extreme industrial relations laws—a
campaign that I know and many opposite know will have a devastating
impact on the government come the next election. (Time expired)
Return
to Speeches Menu.
