Inquiry into Attorney-General Vickie Chapman’s decision over Kangaroo Island seaport begins

The Attorney-General’s decision to reject a Kangaroo Island seaport also prevented timber-laden trucks rumbling near her property, an inquiry has heard.

Timber-laden trucks would have rumbled through forest directly opposite Attorney-General Vickie Chapman’s Kangaroo Island property if she had not rejected plans for a seaport, an inquiry has heard.

The hearing on Tuesday also heard Ms Chapman was not a “suitable person to act as the sole arbiter” in refusing Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers’ application to build the KI seaport because four years earlier she had actively opposed the development.

A parliamentary committee is investigating whether Ms Chapman had a conflict of interest, breached the ministerial code of conduct or misled parliament in rejecting Kangaroo Island Planation Timbers’ proposal to build a seaport at Smith Bay.

The Opposition claims it had evidence Ms Chapman, who has previously described the inquiry as a “witch hunt,” had a conflict of interest in the matter.

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman is the subject of a parliamentary inquiry. Picture Mark Brake

A map Labor says appears to show property owned by Vickie Chapman on Kangaroo Island land across the road from land affected by a $40 million development that she rejected.

Ms Chapman is a sixth-generation local on Kangaroo Island, where she remains a landholder and farmer, which is the basis of the conflict claim.

In August, she was asked in parliament if she or any family member owned land “in an area near or impacted by the KIPT forest or a proposed port at Smith Bay” to which she replied “…in short, no”.

The inquiry is also looking into whether any friendship between Ms Chapman and former Liberal MP and now-KI Mayor Michael Pengilly had any bearing on her decision. Mr Pengilly is not being investigated.

In the first public hearing on Tuesday, former KIPT managing director John Sergeant discussed a 2017 meeting between KIPT, Mr Pengilly and Ms Chapman.

Ms Chapman was the deputy opposition leader and Liberal planning spokeswoman at the time.

Mr Sergeant said Ms Chapman was against the proposal and “explained that she thought we’d picked the wrong location” for the seaport.

Counsel representing the inquiry committee Rachael Gray QC. Picture: Naomi Jellicoe

“She found it hard to believe that we could have selected a site like Smith Bay and she said she would like to see a full consideration of all possible sites in the (environmental impact statement),” he said.

“I’m not sure it’s even lawful to assess a development by requiring the developer to consider other sites.”

Mr Sergeant also noted that haulage routes were of interest to Mr Pengilly “because the haulage route to Smith Bay would in all probability have passed his house.”

Mr Sergeant told the hearing “if it is proper that someone approach this without certain convictions as to the merits of the development then I don’t think Ms Chapman was a suitable person to act as the sole arbiter of the decision”.

Counsel assisting the inquiry committee Rachael Gray QC told the hearing that maps showed Ms Chapman owned property “across the road” from a forest from which haulage trucks would collect timber to take to the seaport under KIPT’s proposal.

Ms Chapman will give evidence to the inquiry on Wednesday. She declined to comment on Tuesday.

Mr Pengilly said people were normally found to have a conflict of interest “because they’ve done something, not because they’ve not done something”.

“This is just reverse b*******,” he said.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman Kyam Maher said if Ms Chapman could not provide a sufficient explanation for her statement to parliament in August, in light of the evidence of her KI property’s location, she must resign or be sacked.

Originally published as Inquiry into Attorney-General Vickie Chapman’s decision over Kangaroo Island seaport begins