Vickie Chapman lashes Labor after KI conflict bombshell

The former Attorney General has savaged the new government over the Kangaroo Island conflict of interest probe that cost her a key Marshall Government role.

The state government is under pressure to reveal the cost of a “Kangaroo court” parliamentary committee that ruled former attorney-general Vickie Chapman had a conflict of interest in a controversial development before she was cleared by the Ombudsman.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman Josh Teague said Ombudsman Wayne Lines’ report exposed the “belligerent and politically-motivated process” behind the committee’s findings, which led to a historic vote of no-confidence in Ms Chapman.

“What was prosecuted in this parliament and led to the bringing down of the deputy premier of South Australia was a shameful episode in our state’s history,” Mr Teague said.

Mr Teague called on Premier Peter Malinauskas to make good on a commitment made by his Attorney-General, Kyam Maher, to reveal the cost of holding the committee.

Vickie Chapman slammed the parliamentary committee as “nothing more than a witch hunt”.

“I’d be only guessing but I won’t be in the least bit surprised if it runs well in excess of $100,000,” Mr Teague said.

He also said the government must declare whether it supported the findings of the Ombudsman, which are at odds with the findings of the committee.

Mr Lines launched a separate, independent investigation last November after the committee’s findings were referred to him by its chairwoman, Labor MP Andrea Michaels.

But Mr Lines’ report, tabled in state parliament on Tuesday, states Ms Chapman did not have a conflict of interest – either actual, potential or perceived – when she rejected the Smith Bay, Kangaroo Island, seaport near property she owns.

Ms Chapman said an application to recuse Labor MP Tom Koutsantonis had not been properly dealt with. Picture: Keryn Stevens

It also found she had committed no breach of the ministerial code.

In a statement to parliament, Ms Chapman, who will shortly retire from politics, criticised the parliamentary committee as “nothing more than a witch hunt” and said it had “all the features of a kangaroo court”.

She said the committee and subsequent report had not properly dealt with an application to recuse Labor MP Tom Koutsantonis on the basis he had “at the very least a reasonable apprehension of bias”, which she said was clear in several of his public statements.

In question time, Mr Koutsantonis, now the manager of government business, said the government accepted both the findings of the Ombudsman and the report of the parliamentary committee, and it was common for there to be conflicting legal opinions on the same issue.

Ombudsman’s KI scandal bombshell

A top-level investigation by the Ombudsman has cleared former deputy premier and attorney-general Vickie Chapman of conflict of interest in the controversial Kangaroo Island development.

In a political bombshell, the independent investigation report is in stark contrast to that of a parliamentary committee that resulted in a historic vote of no confidence in her, and her standing down as deputy premier and attorney-general.

Ombudsman Wayne Lines launched his investigation last November after the committee’s findings against Ms Chapman were referred to him by chairperson of the Select Committee Andrea Michaels.

Mr Lines’ independent report, tabled in state parliament on Tuesday, states Ms Chapman did not have a conflict of interest – either actual, potential or perceived – when she rejected the Smith Bay development.

The report found she did not breach the Ministerial Code of Conduct by not advising former premier Steven Marshall of a conflict of interest and she did not commit maladministration in deciding the Smith Bay application.

The report also found Mr Marshall did not commit maladministration by not making any inquiry as to whether there was any substance to concerns about Ms Chapman being in a position of conflict and ensuring compliance with the code.

Vickie Chapman, left, at the swearing-in ceremony on the first day of the South Australian parliament. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Kelly Barnes

Similarly, it also found no other public officer committed maladministration in connection with Ms Chapman’s determination of the Smith Bay application.

Ms Chapman welcomed the findings clearing herself and “hardworking public servants”.

“The finding that no contract even existed in respect of forestry interests close to my KI property highlights why the Select Committee was deservedly described as a ‘kangaroo court’,” she said.

“I call on the new parliament to take heed of the scolding given and recommended terms and processes for referrals by future Select Committees.’’

Earlier today, Ms Chapman was caught up in a Constitutional stand-off that has thrown grave doubt on whether she is still eligible to remain an MP.

She has said she will resign from politics on May 31.

Vickie Chapman last year in parliament, on the day of the no-confidence vote. Picture: Naomi Jellicoe

Last November the Labor-led parliamentary committee referred the matter to the Ombudsman for further investigation after its own inquiry found Ms Chapman had an actual and perceived conflict of interest, breached the ministerial code of conduct and on three occasions misled parliament in relation to the Smith Bay port proposal, which triggered the no-confidence motion.

The parliamentary inquiry was triggered by fierce criticism of a rejection of an application to build a port facility at Smith Bay on Kangaroo Island to ship timber from.

Ms Chapman, who owns property across the road from a forest contracted to the port proponent, has consistently denied she had any conflict of interest in deciding the application prior to the inquiry being established, when giving evidence and following its politically damaging findings.

In his report Mr Lines states that as Ms Chapman did not live on Kangaroo Island and had “no concrete plan to reside there’’ the potential impacts of the Smith Bay application “generally is not sufficient to enliven conflict of interest consideration”.

He said Ms Chapman was entitled to hold the view that if approved the Smith Bay application would not impact her way of life, an increase in heavy traffic would not impact her because she did not live on the island, the application would not impact the value of her property and it would not affect either her or a lessee’s enjoyment of the property either by disrupting its outlook, accessibility or by increased noise levels.

“Consequently, I am of the opinion that Ms Chapman had good reason to believe that she did not have an actual or potential conflict between her interest in the Gum Valley property and her public duty to impartially consider the Smith bay application on its merits,’’ Mr Lines states.

Opposition leader David Speirs said the report exposed “a total lack of understanding of what is a conflict of interest and how to comply with the Ministerial Code of Conduct’’ by senior government members.

“The Ombudsman rejected a series of accusations made by Labor in parliament, severely damaging Peter Malinauskas’ credibility,’’ Mr Speirs said.

“This raises serious questions about Peter Malinauskas’ leadership and his willingness to prioritise his lust for power above the impartial assessment of evidence.

“He even said this matter was a threat to investor confidence in South Australia. He now owns responsibility for that.’’