Monday, November 03, 2008

Davis to Jennings in Victoria State Parliament

Mr D. DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) -- My question is to the Minister for Environment and Climate Change. What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the obvious conflict of interest in having Mr Dixon from Ajilon holding both a departmental decision-making role and also a contractor role, being contracted to deliver the Electronic Conveyancing Victoria project -- will not allow further losses on top of the tens of millions of dollars already lost on this project?

 

Mr JENNINGS (Minister for Environment and Climate Change) -- I thank Mr David Davis for his question. It has been quite a while coming. I know he has taken his lead from one of his preferred leadership members of the federal Parliament, Senator Brandis, in relation to this.

 

Mr D. Davis -- I think it is the other way round in relation to this.

 

Mr JENNINGS -- Is it? Thank you. Senator Brandis made an outstanding contribution in the federal Parliament last week on this matter -- it was outstanding in a variety of ways. He showed himself to be a modern man by having a photo of himself in the Australian last week holding a book about Robert Menzies. Not even Peter Costello's book could be held in his hands in his office last week, which shows how contemporary he is.

 

The PRESIDENT -- Order! I remind the opposition that we do not tolerate stunts in here. If it wants to engage in a stunt, I will respond accordingly.

 

Mr JENNINGS -- The President gave me the benefit of the doubt because I was responding to a question from the other side. In fact it was not a premeditated engagement, I have to say. I note that this is an issue that Mr Davis has asked questions about before. In fact I have responded on a number of occasions, and my substantive answer continues to be that I deny the imputation within the question that we have wasted taxpayers money in relation to this important program. Whilst significant software and intellectual property has been developed to establish an e-conveyancing system that will support the processing of settlements, discharging of mortgages and other aspects of the settlement process for land transactions in the state of Victoria with the intention -- and in fact there are very good prospects for it -- of it becoming a national system, we dispute the notion that this investment on behalf of the people of Victoria is a sunk investment. We think this is intellectual property and a system that will be in a prime position to be adopted as a national model, and we are very happy for the model that has been established in Victoria to be considered through the Council of Australian Governments process. It will go through a variety of benchmarks and gateways in terms of decision-making processes, which include establishing a governance arrangement for a national system under the COAG model. The report-backs have actually been established for this matter to come back and be considered next year. In relation to the article Mr Davis is relying on -- he can be very grateful that he shares the afterglow of Senator Brandis in relation to this; obviously they are a tag team act and he can be a beneficiary of it in his brief moment in the sun on this issue -- and the question about whether this scheme is now being considered by the commonwealth and being prepared to be adopted by other jurisdictions across the nation, in fact attention was drawn to the contributions of various officers of the Department of Sustainability and Environment because of their standing in terms of the development of this program. In relation to another aspect of his question, first of all it is very important to lay the foundation for where econveyancing is travelling nationally. Then I will consider the last aspect of the question, which is in fact the probity considerations and the appropriateness of decision making that has actually occurred within the department. I can assure Mr Davis and the house that I have had sustained conversations with my department about the matter Mr Davis has raised in relation to the contractual arrangements that have led to the development of this system. I continue to be advised by the department that it has satisfied probity considerations through its probity control group that has involved the relevant aspects of the department's structure and decision-making process in relation to contracting arrangements. I continue to be advised that the department is well satisfied with the probity processes that have been in place, that a conflict as alleged does not exist, and in fact there is a great confidence within the department in this matter. That continues to be the advice that I have sought to verify, to validate, and I continue to be provided by my department in relation to this matter.

 

Supplementary question

 

Mr D. DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) -- I thank the minister for his answer but I do not think it clears up some of the issues involved and therefore I ask: have all tender processes involving the Department of Sustainability and Environment that have awarded a contract to Ajilon Pty Ltd met conflict-of-interest provisions and been subject to full reports by probity auditors; and if so, will he publicly release the probity audits for those contracts between the DSE and Ajilon?

 

Mr JENNINGS (Minister for Environment and Climate Change) -- The answer that I gave was a pretty fulsome answer despite the interjections from Mr Guy, who just wanted to ping me on one word; in fact I gave the complete answer. So in the first instance I gave the complete answer, now Mr Davis has again -- because he is very good at certain contrivances and manipulation of the phrasing of certain questions or propositions he puts to the Parliament; and I will not go beyond describing them as being very good at manipulating phrasing -- where he impugns that the probity process that I have described includes a range of activities that he has now roped in as if they were standard practice, and he knows them not to be. In fact, in terms of the advice that I rely on in relation to the probity controls and tendering arrangements, they satisfy the standard procedures that would be expected across the government, and the additional requirements that are embedded in the question have not been undertaken -- and Mr Davis would have accepted that and understood that to be the case, before he asked the question.

No comments: