Economy
Labor wipes Walker’s $700,000 debt. ‘This does not pass the smell test … in fact, it stinks’
What Walker wanted Ralphs Bay to become
The state government has just waived Walker Corp’s $700,000 debt. How’d you feel if you’re listed on the government’s own list of debtors? Some owe as little as $110.
The Tasmanian Government has agreed to waive a $700,000 debt owed by a developer.
Walker Corporation owed the state government $856,000 relating to the assessment of its failed proposal to build a canal estate at Lauderdale.
The developer has paid $135,000, but is refusing to pay the rest.
The Attorney General, Brian Wightman, says the government has decided to wave the $700,000 debt because it would cost much more to recover the money through the courts.
Mr Wightman says both parties have agreed the full cost of the assessment will not be recovered, ending five years of negotiations.
• Peter: Contrast with this …
http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/fines/enforcementsanctions/publicationofname/Published_List_of_Enforcement_Debtors.xls
• WALKER CORPORATION WALKS AWAY $721,000 BETTER OFF
Laws Need to be Changed
Tim Morris MP
Greens Planning spokesperson
Friday, 10 August 2012
The Tasmanian Greens today described as an outrageous insult to injury that Walker Corporation will be walking away with unpaid debts of at least $721, 000, despite the years of anxiety and stress inflicted upon the community due to their controversial Ralphs Bay marina project.
Greens Planning spokesperson Tim Morris MP said that the relevant laws needed to be tightened to close any legal loophole to ensure this situation cannot be repeated.
Mr Morris had been pursuing through the State Parliament earlier this year the matter of Walker Corporation’s outstanding debt, and the need for the State undertake all it could to collect the moneys owed.
“Walker Corp having its debt of over $700, 000 owed to the state written off is a massive and unacceptable slap in the face of the many Tasmanians who were subjected to years of stress, anxiety while standing up for the integrity of Ralphs Bay,” Mr Morris said.
“Reading between the lines of Minister Wightman’s statement it appears that the State does not believe it has a legal case to pursue Walkers Corp through the courts successfully. Clearly the laws need to be changed and any legal loopholes closed to ensure this cannot happen again.”
“Walker Corp knew the process by which its flawed Ralphs Bay marine project would be assessed, and that there was always a possibility of an unsuccessful application having to pay costs, yet now they to seek, and will get away with, avoiding paying up and meeting their financial obligations to the community.”
“Many courageous Tasmanians put their, houses, careers and professional reputations on the line over years of campaigning, largely funded out of their own pockets, to stand up against Walker’s obscene marina proposal. These people have been let down badly by Walker being able to walk away $731,000 better off than if they had been required to pay their dues in full.”
“The laws that allow them to get away with this need to be changed. The Greens are calling on the Attorney-General to commit to reforming the state’s laws in light of this outrageous situation,” Mr Morris said.
House of Assembly Hansard Extracts:
June 20, 2012
WALKER CORPORATION DEBT TO STATE
Mr MORRIS (Question) – My question is to the Minister for Justice. Minister, a couple of months ago I asked you whether you had made any progress in getting Walker Corporation to pay their outstanding debts to Tasmania for costs associated with planning assessment of their proposal to destroy a substantial part of Ralphs Bay. Again I ask you if you can advise whether Walker Corporation has yet paid its debt; if not, why not? If not, can you confirm whether your office or department have submitted a formal request in writing to Walker Corporation? If so, can you detail the manner and content of any such communication, and specifically whether you have asked them to pay up?
Mr WIGHTMAN – I thank the member for his question. As we all know, the proposal for marine and residential development at Lauderdale quay was declared a project of state significance in July 2006. At that time it was referred to what was known as the RPDC, which is now the Tasmanian Planning Commission, for assessment under the State Polices and Projects Act.
I am advised that there was an exchange of letters at the time between the Department of Economic Development and Walker’s. Walker’s indicated that it would pay the costs associated with the assessment process of up to $1.107 million, excluding GST. As at 16 August 2011, Walker Corporation had paid a total of $386 503 so there is currently an outstanding amount of $721 108.
As part of the ongoing discussions, advice has been received that there is nothing in the State Policies and Projects Act 1993 which relevantly requires Walker Corporation to pay the cost of the assessment process. I can advise that Walker Corporation is well aware of this situation. We are still under correspondence with Walker Corporation in an attempt to resolve the outstanding matters on a commercial basis. It would not be helpful to go into further detail than I have today. I will continue to update the House about discussions we have with Walker Corp and where we get to as they conclude.
—-
May 17, 2012
WALKER CORPORATION DEBT TO STATE
Mr MORRIS (Question) – My question is to the Minister for Justice and follows what I asked him earlier in the week. Minister, are you aware of an article on page 57 of today’s Australian Financial Review regarding a certain property developer, Mr Walker, whose company, Walker Corporation, still owes the state of Tasmania approximately $721 000, thanks to the divisive Lauderdale Quays development? This article notes that Mr Walker’s wealth last year was estimated at $1.74 billion. The article also details that Mr Walker currently plans to build up to 400 new houses on a newly-acquired block of land in the New South Wales Hunter Valley, with his development having an estimated value of more than $200 million. Minister, is this not a bit rich that the head of Walker Corporation is estimated to be worth $1.7 billion, dabbling in projects estimated to rake in hundreds of millions of dollars, and yet his corporation has delayed for approximately two years the paying of state debt? Given that the ongoing negotiations to recover this debt must be costing your department a considerable amount of time and money, have you thought of writing directly to Mr Walker to request that he expedites payment of this debt, as he can clearly afford it?
Ms O’Connor – Hear, hear.
Mr WIGHTMAN – One thing I will not start in this House is class warfare and I must say I do not have a problem with people making money or with investment in Tasmania. Where we may differ from the Liberals is in the distribution of that wealth. That is where we would differ. But I do not have a problem with investment. In fact, I encourage investment in Tasmania. We, on this side, absolutely support sustainable investment in Tasmania and long may it continue.
————
May 15, 2012
RALPHS BAY – WALKER CORPORATION COSTS
Mr MORRIS (Question) – My question is to the Attorney-General. Attorney, you may recall a development proposal a few years ago – Lauderdale Quay – that was going to destroy some significant wetlands and was ultimately rejected by the planning process. Minister, is it not a fact that approximately 12 months ago, you stated that Walker Corporation, the proponent of this appalling proposal to fill in Ralphs Bay, still owned some money to the Department of Justice – approximately $750 000 – for costs incurred in assessing their proposal? Can you please detail to the House how much Walker Corporation has been billed for these costs and whether that account has now been fully paid? If not, how much remains outstanding and when do you expect it to be paid? If no more has been paid, and if Walker Corporation continues to shirk its obligations and dud the Tasmanian taxpayer, what will you be doing to recoup the costs?
Mr WIGHTMAN – I thank the member for his question. The Lauderdale Quay development caused some controversy at the time, and I notice that the member chooses to push an environmental point. He is also asking a question about debt, which I find quite interesting. The debt arose out of a proposed marine and residential development at Lauderdale Quay, which did not go ahead.
Ms O’Connor – No, it’s at Ralphs Bay.
Mr WIGHTMAN – Discussions with Walker Corporation are still going on and we hope to settle that debate. The debt-recovery process that we are using is very much consistent with the collection of other normal commercial debt of the department and we will continue to pursue that money. The debt is approximately $721 000 and we will continue to pursue it, as we do with normal commercial debt that is owed to the department.
[ends]
First published: 2012-08-10 04:40 AM
• Walker Debt Write-Off Highlights Urgent Need for Coastal Reform
EDO Tasmania, who represented Save Ralphs Bay Inc in the Lauderdale Quay canal estate hearings, is very disappointed by the decision to waive the outstanding debt owed by Walker Corporation.
EDO lawyer, Jess Feehely, said that the decision is further evidence of the need for urgent coastal planning reforms:
“The Tasmanian government’s decision to waive over $700,000 in outstanding assessment fees highlights two things: the ongoing costs resulting from the lack of a coherent State Coastal Policy, and just how important it is for the government to do something about it.”
The Tasmanian Planning Commission concluded in 2010 that the Lauderdale Quay proposal was “inherently unsustainable”. However, that conclusion was reached only after a long and costly assessment process. Ms Feehely is concerned that, without urgent legislative reform, similar assessment costs could be incurred in future.
“Without a comprehensive and enforceable coastal framework that clearly delineates appropriate and inappropriate developments, developers, local governments and the community are still faced with uncertainty. Until that uncertainty is resolved, assessment of unacceptable proposals will continue to divert limited government and community resources.”
Current lack of guidance and poor coastal management practices also continue to impose indirect costs such as ecosystem losses, rehabilitation and stabilisation works and emergency responses to coastal inundation.
“The $700,000 the government no longer plans to recover from Walker Corporation could have been a useful injection of resources to facilitate better coastal management in Tasmania. More importantly, failure to implement a strong coastal framework soon will expose the government to many more significant costs in future.”
Ms Feehely urged the government to respond to the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s recommendations and develop an effective coastal management and planning framework as a matter of urgency.
Jess Feehely
Principal Lawyer
Environmental Defenders Office (Tas) Inc
131 Macquarie Street
Hobart TAS 7000
Ph: +61 3 6223 2770
Email: jess.feehely@edo.org.au
www.edo.org.au/edotas