Steve Gollschewski reveals why he referred Stones Corner building lease to Crime and Corruption Commission

Commissioner Steve Gollschewski has for the first time opened up on his decision to refer the $240m Stones Corner building lease to the CCC.

Commissioner Steve Gollschewski says he referred the $240m Stones Corner building lease to the CCC for transparency purposes.

Commissioner Steve Gollschewski says he referred the controversial $240m Stones Corner building lease to the Crime and Corruption Commission for transparency purposes and because he was required to report anything where there was a “reasonable suspicion of misconduct or other corrupt activity”.

The lease of the building has plagued the Queensland Police Service after senior police officers met and chose the location, for a 15-year lease, with the option for an eight-year extension.

The Courier-Mail revealed the controversial deal of up to $240m in September and that developers had only paid $45m for the building in 2021.

The site of the future police station at Stones Corner. Picture: Steve Pohlner

It’s understood a handful of senior people within the service were involved in choosing the site and proceeding with the deal.

Mr Gollschewski ordered an audit of the deal, which is being undertaken by Kordamentha, and told The Courier-Mail he had been concerned about the cost and “governance”.

He said he had “inherited” the lease after taking on the Commissioner role this year, with the deal completed before he took over as the state’s top police officer.

This week he said he had referred the lease to the Crime and Corruption Commission. At a press conference on Friday, Mr Gollschewski was asked why he made the referral.

“Look we have a system in our Act (the Police Service Administration Act) that requires us to report anything where there is reasonable suspicion of misconduct or other corrupt activity and that’s a very broad range of things,” Mr Gollschewksi said.

“We take a very deliberate stance on that and making sure that we are completely transparent as an organisation and that we are holding ourselves to the highest possible standards.

“So I can tell you that in this instance because of the circumstances, that that was the appropriate thing to do. So that was my decision.

“That doesn’t pre-empt the outcome of any investigation at all, nor does it point the finger at any individual.”

When asked if he believed there was any element of corruption Mr Gollschewski responded “no, I’m not saying anything”.

“I’m saying we are waiting to see what the investigation finds and then we will be very happy to talk about what the outcomes of the investigation are once its properly confirmed,” he said.

Mr Gollschewski said he made the original request for an audit because “I couldn’t get the answers I wanted”.

He said there was a real operational need for the facility but that he wanted to know how the service came to the decision and how it came to its funding decisions.