DEJA VIEW AT COUNCIL

COUNCIL last night held a surprise second vote on the future of the Bruce Bishop Car Park – and again strongly backed its sale.

The vote took place after Local Government Minister Stirling Hinchliffe informed several councillors that their potential conflicts of interest were not “substantive” and they were able to vote.

Mayor Tom Tate and councillors Peter Young and Gary Baildon left the chamber. Of the remaining councillors in the room, only two voted against the car park sale.

THE Bruce Bishop Car Park vote has been revisited in a sensational turn of events at a full council meeting, with councillors voting a second time to back its sale.

Councillors at a previous meeting voted to sell the Surfers Paradise asset for $48 million so council can build a $125 million cultural precinct without hiking up rates.

Due to the new State Government conflict of interest reforms, only eight councillors at that meeting – Cameron Caldwell, Pauline Young, Gail O’Neill, Dawn Crichlow, Daphne McDonald, William Owen Jones, Glenn Tozer and Kristyn Boulton – remained in the chamber with the vote sixto-two to sell the asset.

The other six councillors and Mayor Tom Tate declared potential conflicts of interest and left the chamber. Councillors determined the Mayor had a material conflict because of his involvement in a consortium developing the nearby Surfers Paradise bowls club.

As yesterday’s full council meeting reached an end, council CEO Dale Dickson spoke to councillors about a surprise late item. Mayor Tom Tate and councillors Peter Young and Gary Baildon immediately left the chamber.

What emerged in debate was Mr Dickson had received advice on the matter from Local Government Minister Stirling Hinchliffe.

Planning chair Cameron Caldwell questioned the process, asking how the CEO wrote to the Minister to seek clarification without the knowledge of councillors.

Mr Dickson told him: “I am happy to explain in writing what transpired in the aftermath of the last meeting. There is certainly no question of my ability to raise the issue with the Minister.

“I didn’t do so in a vacuum. I advised the Mayor of my concerns where we thought the issue was at. But I had to be careful out of respect for the Mayor because of the particular circumstances.

“I have not said to any of you that you are obliged to be in the room. What I was aiming to do was to get decisive advice from the Minister, and to then give you plenty of time

to put you in a position to redecide the matter.

“Now as events have transpired – as I’ve said to you, we’ve received the correspondence at 4 o’clock today.”

Mr Dickson said Cr Tate was aware of the issue but had appropriately decided to place himself at “arm’s length” to proceedings.

Cr Caldwell said he could not understand how the CEO had “narrowed it down to three people that you determined were in the serious category” in terms of conflict.

Mr Dickson replied: “That’s a valid question … it was very clear to the Minister that it was open to him to disagree with the proposition that three councillors who had a more, if you like had a more serious conflict disclosure, to apply the same ruling to them.

“So he’s formed a view – I can say to you confidently that’s part of the reason why it has taken the time it has since the letter was sent to get the response we have got.”

The Minister by letter late yesterday informed several councillors that their conflict was not “substantive” and they were able to vote. When the vote was held again, of the remaining councillors in the room, only Daphne McDonald and Dawn Crichlow voted against the car park sale.