6 hours ago
5
A Perth property developer has taken the stand on the second day of a defamation trial more than seven years in the making, telling the WA Supreme Court the state government called on him to help with the removal of soil from a major infrastructure project.
Strzelecki Group chairman Greg Poland and his daughter Jennifer Poland, who is also the managing director of the company, both gave evidence about allegations published by this masthead in 2019 regarding his role in trying to secure a deal with the state government to dump millions of tonnes of “toxic soil” from the Forrestfield Airport site in the Peel region.
A second article published a day later and also included in the proceedings alleged Mr Poland had claimed an attempt to increase WA’s lobster catch was his plan, but the government had “botched it”.
The articles were based on covert recordings taken without Mr Poland’s consent at a meeting at the Subiaco Hotel, which he attended as part of his role as deputy chairman of the Peel Development Commission, but which he claims was a private meeting.
One of Mr Poland’s key contentions was that the soil was not toxic and should not have been labelled as such, with his lawyer Martin Bennett telling the court on Monday that a publicly available document and a background note from then-fisheries minister Dave Kelly’s office both supported the claim it was not toxic.
On the stand on Tuesday, Mr Poland said he was told the cost of moving the soil from the Forrestfield Airport site was up to $300 million, and was a headache the state government had asked him to help resolve.
“There were two million tonnes on the airport land, and they wanted it gone,” he said.
In the recording of the meeting, Mr Poland can allegedly be heard telling a local business owner they could acquire a parcel of land in Myalup without going to tender, if they facilitated the dumping of “between two and eight tonnes” of soil from the Forrestfield Airport to his land in Waroona.
Mr Poland told the court on Tuesday all he was trying to do was to get something down in writing that the government could work with.
Bennett asked if Mr Poland knew the meeting was being recorded, and if he would consent to it being recorded if he had been asked, to which he responded: “No.”
“Why would I? It was a private meeting,” he said.
Mr Poland said he had to work with government ministers, and he did not want them reading or seeing comments from an official meeting “saying they are useless shits”.
Earlier on Tuesday, Mr Poland’s daughter Jennifer Poland was questioned over why her father had asked for note-taking to stop during the meeting.
She said he had invoked Chatham House Rules, because he was going to give his opinion on what minister would do a good job, and what departments would do a good job.
“He didn’t want those comments going back to ministers because he had to work with them,” Ms Poland said.
After receiving questions from a journalist at this masthead based on the recordings of the meeting, Mr Poland told the court he spoke with then-regional development minister Alannah MacTiernan about the allegations.
“If its politics they [journalists] keep coming after you,” Mr Poland said MacTiernan had told him.
“She told me, ‘I’ve accepted your resignation already [from the Peel Development Commission], that stops it’.”
Discussing the second story published, Mr Poland told the court he had mentioned the idea of licensing boats to catch lobsters for the domestic market at a Labor roundtable with then-premier Mark McGowan, and other ministers, who told him they loved the idea.
Mr Poland claimed then-fisheries minister Kelly was also supportive of the proposal.
The state government then released the report WA’s Western Rock Lobster Plan - Industry growth plan to create jobs.
“I don’t like the way they took the idea and changed it, so the government owned the licences,” Mr Poland told the court.
But he said the government had reached out to him asking for a public statement of support, which he supplied.
Mr Poland was then cross-examined by Nine’s lawyer Matthew Lewis, who asked whether he would agree the Peel region was cherished for its ecological significance.
“They wouldn’t allow that level of mining and destruction there if it was all cherished,” Mr Poland replied.
Questioned on the number of times he had met with the landowner he was discussing the deal with, Mr Poland said the Peel Development Commission chairman had largely been dealing with him and the plans regarding the transfer of the sand.
Developer ‘angry’ over journalists’ questions
Ms Poland said her father had been “very angry” when he first received questions from journalists, allegedly saying: “All I’ve tried to do is help.”
After the initial article was published, she said her father could not believe it was happening, or why ministers quoted in the article had “said what they had”.
“He said, ‘They know me, they know my deal’,” Ms Poland recalled.
“He was destroyed by it.”
Ms Poland reached out to Bennett after her father received questions from this masthead, and the lawyer sent a letter to journalists before the publication of both stories.
It was over these letters, and her recount of events, that Ms Poland was questioned by Nine’s lawyer Martin Goldblatt.
A letter sent to the journalists from Bennett on behalf of the Polands categorised the soil as “toxic” or “contaminated” several times.
However, Ms Poland argued there were different levels of “contaminated” when asked why, if she believed that to be incorrect, she had approved the letter being sent.
She also argued many of the direct quotes, taken from the recording at the Subiaco Hotel, were out of context and that her father often spoke a certain way due to his dyslexia.
The trial continues, with Mr Poland expected to return to the stand tomorrow.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
