❓ Hon. Neil Thomson questions the Minister for Finance regarding discrepancies in the valuation and sale price of the Landgate building, alleging misinformation provided to Parliament. The Minister apologizes for misleading information.
AnsweredQoN 278Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
LANDGATE
OFFICES — SALE
278. Hon NEIL THOMSON to the Minister for Finance:
I refer to the minister's
answer to question without notice 195 concerning the valuation of the Landgate
building.
(1) Why did the
minister say there was no valuation dated 1 December 2020 when her agency
provided that very valuation by means of freedom of information to WAtoday?
(2) Is the
minister aware that the valuation, which was conducted by McGees Property, was
of the building as an unencumbered sale?
(3) Is the
minister aware that the valuation was significantly higher than the $17.5 million
for which the building was sold?
(4) Why does the minister continue
to suppress information on the valuation?
(5) Did the minister mislead
Parliament with the answer provided to me on 14 March 2023?
OFFICES — SALE
278. Hon NEIL THOMSON to the Minister for Finance:
I refer to the minister's
answer to question without notice 195 concerning the valuation of the Landgate
building.
(1) Why did the
minister say there was no valuation dated 1 December 2020 when her agency
provided that very valuation by means of freedom of information to WAtoday?
(2) Is the
minister aware that the valuation, which was conducted by McGees Property, was
of the building as an unencumbered sale?
(3) Is the
minister aware that the valuation was significantly higher than the $17.5 million
for which the building was sold?
(4) Why does the minister continue
to suppress information on the valuation?
(5) Did the minister mislead
Parliament with the answer provided to me on 14 March 2023?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) In my
response to the honourable member's question without notice 195
provided on 14 March 2023, I advised, based
on advice from the Department of Finance, that no valuation was dated 1 December
2020. In response to the same question, I advised that the independent
valuation report dated March 2021 valued the Landgate building at $17.99 million.
In fact, the valuation report was provided to the Department of Planning, Lands
and Heritage in March 2021, not the date of the valuation. I can advise the
honourable member that the valuation to determine the $17.99 million figure was
dated 1 December 2020. This error, in referring to the date it was provided to
the agency rather than the date of valuation, was not intentional.
(2) Yes.
(3) The valuation
for the Landgate building provided in the valuation report dated March 2021 was
$17.99 million. Following negotiations with the purchaser, the agreed sale
price was $17.33 million, allowing for some rectification works to be
undertaken with the ground floor slab. Any other valuation referred to in the
Landgate annual report is materially different, developed for a different
purpose and is based on different assumptions. The valuations are not
comparable.
(4) I have
provided the honourable member with the valuation figure of $17.99 million for
the Landgate building that was provided to
the agency in March 2021. Further information in the valuation report remains commercial in confidence.
(5) I apologise
to the honourable member and the house for providing misleading information in
response to question without notice 195.
some notice of the question.
(1) In my
response to the honourable member's question without notice 195
provided on 14 March 2023, I advised, based
on advice from the Department of Finance, that no valuation was dated 1 December
2020. In response to the same question, I advised that the independent
valuation report dated March 2021 valued the Landgate building at $17.99 million.
In fact, the valuation report was provided to the Department of Planning, Lands
and Heritage in March 2021, not the date of the valuation. I can advise the
honourable member that the valuation to determine the $17.99 million figure was
dated 1 December 2020. This error, in referring to the date it was provided to
the agency rather than the date of valuation, was not intentional.
(2) Yes.
(3) The valuation
for the Landgate building provided in the valuation report dated March 2021 was
$17.99 million. Following negotiations with the purchaser, the agreed sale
price was $17.33 million, allowing for some rectification works to be
undertaken with the ground floor slab. Any other valuation referred to in the
Landgate annual report is materially different, developed for a different
purpose and is based on different assumptions. The valuations are not
comparable.
(4) I have
provided the honourable member with the valuation figure of $17.99 million for
the Landgate building that was provided to
the agency in March 2021. Further information in the valuation report remains commercial in confidence.
(5) I apologise
to the honourable member and the house for providing misleading information in
response to question without notice 195.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.