Conflict councillor gets to have a say

SEVERAL Gold Coast City councillors have backflipped on a decision to toss one of their own out of a meeting to approve a high-rise tower application because of his clash with leading developers.

In late August, Robinabased councillor Hermann Vorster criticised a proposed four-tower development on a 1.3ha site at Varsity Lakes because he felt it would affect surrounding residential streets.

Sunland’s Soheil Abedian, who built the iconic Q1 and Palazzo Versace, publicly criticised Cr Vorster at the time, accusing him of “re-election motives” after the councillor asked the State Government to forcibly seize the land.

On Wednesday, councillors at a planning committee meeting voted to remove Cr Vorster from the chamber when discussing a tower development at Varsity Lakes planned by a consortium which included the Sunland Group.

The nine and 10-storey buildings formed part of a development application at Capital Court by a heavyweight consortium including Homecorp, Sunland Group and Condev Construction.

Cr Vorster declared a perceived personal interest at Wednesday’s meeting.

“The nature of the interest is two members of the proposed consortium have publicly criticised me for my fitness of office after I suggested the State Government acquire the subject site in the public interest — Homecorp and Sunland,” he wrote in detailing the conflict for the meeting secretary.

But Cr Vorster told colleagues he had considered his position and believed he could participate in the vote.

He argued it was not in the public interest if “those part of a powerful consortium may, at no cost, open the possibility of a councillor being excluded from a significant planning decision by criticising their electoral prospects or character”.

Gary Baildon, Gail O’Neill, Paul Taylor and committee chair Cameron Caldwell supported the view that Cr Vorster had a real or perceived conflict of interest and “will not be able to make a decision solely on planning reason”.

That changed at yesterday’s full council meeting.

Cr Caldwell asked Cr Vorster whether he had an “open mind” on the application and could be persuaded in any debate about it.

Cr Vorster replied that “the answer is yes” because his earlier comments were about State interests on the site rather than the project itself.

The application was approved with Cr Vorster supporting it but getting the backing of councillors for improved transport measures.

Councillors Baildon, O’Neill, Taylor and Caldwell changed their position by supporting a motion by Cr Glenn Tozer that Cr Vorster stay in the room.