Debate resumed from 25 February 2010.

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER [4.06 p.m.]: I have previously commented on the momentous inquiry undertaken by General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4 into the land dealings at Badgerys Creek. Members may recall that the inquiry commenced last year after some rather sensational events involving Mr Michael McGurk, who was shot and killed outside his family home. Subsequently it was revealed that before his death, Mr McGurk had made an audiotape recording of a conversation between himself and property developer Mr Ron Medich. Mr McGurk alleged that the recording implicated senior New South Wales Government figures in bribery and corruption in relation to land dealings at Badgerys Creek. Mr Ron Medich and his brother, Mr Roy Medich, owned the land in question.

In September last year the Legislative Council referred terms of reference for the inquiry to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4. The inquiry was conducted and an interim report was presented to the House. The committee was not able to report completely because during the hearings the committee committed a substantial number of questions to responses on notice. Moreover, committee members had submitted a number of written questions on notice to witnesses after each hearing. The witnesses provided a response to each question taken on notice, with one exception, and that was Mr Graham Richardson.

Mr Graham Richardson appeared as a witness at the committee's second hearing in October last year. Subsequently the committee's secretariat wrote to him seeking answers to a question taken on notice during the hearing and answers to written questions on notice from committee members that were submitted after the hearing. Mr Richardson was asked to respond to the questions taken on notice by a particular deadline in October, but no response was received by that time. Then Mr Richardson indicated verbally to the secretariat that he would not be providing a response to the questions taken on notice. The committee did not receive any written confirmation from Mr Richardson in relation to that particular matter.

Last year on Remembrance Day the committee had a meeting and, following a resolution of the committee, wrote to Mr Richardson and requested him to answer the questions submitted on notice by a particular deadline, which was later that month. The committee also submitted an additional written question on notice, which I wrote. That was also sent to Mr Richardson. He was asked to reply by a certain deadline. He was told that if he declined to answer the questions on notice the committee would consider whether to issue him with a summons to attend a hearing to give further evidence. Mr Richardson then provided an interim response to the questions placed on notice but questioned the authority under which the committee was acting. I am grateful to the Clerks for their assistance in providing the relevant advice to Mr Richardson, which we did on the same day, detailing the committee's powers to seek answers to questions on notice.

The committee then considered a draft report. It considered the fact that Mr Richardson had outstanding answers to the questions on notice, and it decided that the answers to the questions asked of Mr Richardson could have added to or changed the outcomes of the inquiry and so could affect its final report. Mr Richardson's failure to respond made it difficult for the committee to complete the task that the House had asked it to do. So the committee resolved to table its substantive report and seek an extension of time to allow the committee to prepare a supplementary report if necessary. The committee then invited Mr Richardson to attend a hearing in December and answer questions from the committee. He agreed to appear voluntarily, and during that appearance he answered a number of questions, including questions relating to the taped conversation between Mr McGurk and Mr Medich.

The Hon. Trevor Khan: Amongst other things.

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER: Amongst an extraordinary range of other things. In the meantime the Independent Commission Against Corruption was running what might be called a parallel inquiry into matters relating to the claims about Mr McGurk's tape. The committee noted the work of the commission; in particular the committee welcomed the publication of the commission's findings in relation to the allegations by Mr McGurk. The commission noted that there was no clear evidence that the meetings or communications between planning officials and proponents and representatives of the Badgerys Creek consortium influenced planning decisions regarding the Medich site; the consortium's land has not been rezoned and the efforts of the landowners and their representatives, particularly lobbyist Mr Richardson, have to date been unsuccessful in achieving any commitment to rezoning in the near future. In the meantime the Government, via the Department of Premier and Cabinet, recently responded to the recommendations.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a future day.