NEW TATE PROBE

The Crime and Corruption Commission has launched another investigation into the conduct at city hall, following previous allegations that include Mayor Tom Tate engineered council decisions to secure personal gain

THE State’s crime watchdog has launched another investigation into the Gold Coast City Council following a complaint about the race horse interests of Mayor Tom Tate and Deputy Mayor Donna Gates.

It follows other Crime and Corruption Commission probes, including allegations Cr Tate engineered council decisions to secure personal gain.

THE State’s corruption watchdog will investigate whether Mayor Tom Tate and Deputy Mayor Donna Gates both failed to declare an interest and partnership in race horses.

The Bulletin this month revealed a complaint was lodged to the Crime and Corruption Commission against the backdrop of council making a decision to fill in Black Swan Lake.

The complaint was lodged just 24 hours after a report detailed how the CCC was launching an investigation into up to eight development matters, including the sale of the Bruce Bishop carpark in Surfers Paradise, including accusations Cr Tate stood to gain personally.

A letter sent this week from the CCC to a complainant listed the following allegations:

Cr Tate since January 2017 had an interest in a race horse and racing syndicate partnership believed to exceed $5000, which he had not recorded in his Register of Interest.

Cr Gates, since early 2017, had an interest in a race horse and had not recorded the interest or partnership in her Register of Interests.

Cr Tate had a conflict of interest for failing to declare his interest or partnership in the horse when involved in a council decision related to Black Swan Lake.

Cr Gates had a conflict of interest for failing to declare her race horse interests when the same decision was made.

Cr Tate yesterday said: “I respect the confidentiality of the CCC’’. Deputy Mayor Gates said: “I will fully co-operate with the CCC if required.’’

In its letter, the CCC said in dealing with a complaint it must consider “the circumstances of the case” and the “corruption principles” set out under legislation.

The CCC admitted it could recognise the responsibility of the council chief executive officer and senior managers to manage their agency in dealing with inappropriate behaviour of staff.

But a CCC integrity services office wrote: “The CCC, in performing its corruption function, must focus on the more serious cases of corrupt conduct and systemic corruption in accordance with section 35(3) of the Act.

“The Act also recognises that in certain circumstances the CCC can decide not to take any action in relation to a complaint. The CCC considers it appropriate for the CCC to take responsibility for your concerns numbered 1-3 above.”

The officer said the CCC would have required evidence to support a criminal offence to investigate the final fourth complaint against Cr Gates.

Cr Gates has been extremely confident she had fulfilled all her obligations under the law regarding her register of interests, and has not updated since the complaint.

The Deputy Mayor did not vote on the Black Swan Lake decision on July 25 to allow the Gold Coast Turf Club to fill in the lake for a horse training area and overflow car park.

She left the council chamber “due to her being an honorary member of the Gold Coast Turf Club and director of the Gold Coast Turf Club”.

Cr Tate did declare a real or perceived conflict due to him being a member of the turf club, but stayed in the chamber for the debate and voted.

A search on racing ownership shows that some of the 14 co-owners are high profile businessmen on the Coast.

The complainant this week sent to the CCC more documents including a copy of the Mayor’s Facebook page from March 8 and an updated Register of Interests.

The Mayor’s Facebook post ridiculed the Bulletin’s report that the CCC had received a complaint about his race horse ownership.

The complainant claims Cr Tate’s “sarcastic” Facebook post showed his “lack of consideration of his legal responsibilities ... it appears that he either fails to comprehend his legal obligations, or considers that he doesn’t have to comply with them”.