An independent review of the purchase of land next to the new Western Sydney Airport, for which the government paid $27 million more than the land was valued at, has found no evidence of "poor integrity, criminal activity or personal benefit for officers involved in the transaction".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The land, known as the Leppington Triangle, was bought by the government in 2018, but an audit report published last year led to the department referring the matter to the Australian Federal Police.
Along with the police referral, the matter has been subject to four different investigations, including an independent review by Sententia Consulting.
Tabled in Senate estimates on Monday, the report found the strategy for buying the land was "heavily focused" on maintaining a good relationship with the land owners, the Leppington Pastoral Company, but not on managing the risk of not getting value for money.
"In undertaking the acquisition, relevant officers made, or failed to make, a number of decisions which exposed the acquisition to unnecessary risk," the report said.
"Further, the acquisition failed to apply key process controls to ensure that the government's outcomes were achieved while its interests were protected."
Failures by the department included failing to obtain and present sufficient information to show the amount paid was value for money, failing to document analysis of options and risks, and the "absence of a rigorous negotiation plan, thereby potentially weakening the Commonwealth's negotiation position in reaching an agreed amount to pay".
In yet another damning report into the acquisition of the land, the consultants found a range of factors contributed to the failures, including turnover in the leadership responsible at key points in the transaction, and a significant "span of control" across leaders.
"It is clear that the department did not undertake all reasonable steps to determine what a suitable cost would be for the government to acquire the property, to demonstrate that the price paid for the property represented an efficient, effective, economical and ethical use of public funds."
Mark Harrison, who wrote the report, wasn't commissioned to find if the sale was value for money for the government.
"While there is no question that the likely future benefit from the acquisition is significant, it has come at a high reputational cost to the department," he said in the report. But the report didn't find the department could have made an offer at $3 million that would have been accepted by the owners.
Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:
- Bookmark canberratimes.com.au
- Download our app
- Make sure you are signed up for our breaking and regular headlines newsletters
- Follow us on Twitter
- Follow us on Instagram
Sally Whyte
I report on a range of issues in federal politics and the public service, with a real passion for how decisions made in Canberra affect the lives of Australians.
I report on a range of issues in federal politics and the public service, with a real passion for how decisions made in Canberra affect the lives of Australians.
