Meet John Barilaro - Deputy-Premier, Minister for Regional News South Wales and property developer

 

ABC News, 11 September 2020

The NSW Deputy-Premier, Minister for Regional New South Wales and National Party MP for Monaro since 2011 (shown left) - who formerly worked in the family business manufacturing timber products and who went on to become a property developer in his own right - has some questions to answer.

Starting with this……..

The Sydney Morning Herald, 29 November 2020:

The controversy centres on the demise of the Marco Polo Social Club, which for decades was a thriving social hub for Queanbeyan’s large Italian community.

John Barilaro joined the board of the Social Club in 1995, seven years after his father, Domenico Barilaro, who died earlier this year.

The Barilaros were both directors of the Social Club in 1996 when it sold its clubhouse for $300,000 to Monaro Properties Pty Ltd.

John Barilaro was Monaro Properties’ secretary and Domenico Barilaro was one of its directors at the time. The pair also purchased shares in Monaro Properties six months after it acquired the clubhouse.

The Social Club went broke in the early 2000s.

According to the minutes of a creditors’ meeting in February 2003, the social club’s administrator commented that he was “concerned that a number of company directors may have a conflict of interest in that they are also actively involved in the management of the company that owns the company’s trading premises”.

The club’s demise was publicly blamed on mounting debts, an “unforgiving fiscal market” and infighting among board members.

With the clubhouse no longer needed, Monaro Properties on-sold it for $1.025 million in mid 2004, securing the company a $700,000 windfall.

There is no evidence John Barilaro directly financially benefited, as he was no longer a shareholder or director of Monaro Properties at the time.

However Domenico Barilaro was still a director of Monaro Properties at the time

It is unclear whether Domenico Barilaro still held his shares because the company did not lodge a financial return that year.

However ASIC records show Domenico Barilaro held shares before the transaction in 2002 and afterwards in 2005 and there was no publicly available record of any change to his shareholdings.

On 26 March 2001 Giovanni (John) Domenic Barilaro MLA entered the NSW Parliament as a backbencher.

It took him a little over 5 years and 7 months to work his way up to being Leader of the Nationals in the NSW Parliament, a position which automatically made him Deputy-Premier of New South Wales, and another 1 year & 15 weeks to add Minister for Regional New South Wales to his current titles.

Like many other parliamentarians John Barilaro comes with a backstory he created and elaborated for the benefit of parliament, telling the Legislative Assembly that he had stood for election because; “I have had a gutful of a Government, led by the vocal minority, selling out our hopes and dreams; a Government that was infected by a corrupt culture, which was attacking and abandoning the virtues and qualities of this once-great State.”

Again like many other parliamentarians, Barilaro’s backstory does not quite match up with what both mainstream media articles and his voting record reveal about him.

Although he probably came closest to uttering one particular unvarnished truth when he spoke with a Fairfax-Nine journalist recently: "Barilaro has defended pork barrelling for regional seats, even dubbing himself "Pork Barilaro"...."that's what people would expect from me". 

Nor are many parliamentarians quick to publicly and loudly inform the electorate of exactly what they they disclosed to Parliament concerning their financial affairs.

So voters in NSW disturbed about the Nationals push for more logging on private rural land and increased vegetation clearing on agricultural land – seen by many concerned regional residents as a crafted backdoor to increased residential development on the fringes of existing towns and villages – never realise that the Nationals Leader insisting on this landowner 'right' is himself a property developer.

This is a basic outline of his business background since entering state politics......

At the present time John Barilaro appears to jointly own five properties, including “Dungowan” a 94ha rural estate he & wife purchased for est. 2 million about six years ago & industrial land he owns with his brother on which the family had operated three companies.

"Dungowan" and its very extensive grounds have been operating as a 13-bed Airbnb villa since at least August 2014. Currently it charges $1,850.00/per night per person. A fact that to date is not yet attached to Barilaro's last publicly available online Register of Disclosures by Members of the Legislative Assembly 

The 'Estate' as a business is being managed by Barilaro's wife who seems to also act as official greeter for Airbnb guests and, this property would potentially generate est. $160,000 per year for Barialaro and his wife.

Previously Barilaro was joint owner of Ryleho Pty Ltd (presumed voluntarily deregistered in January 2019) & Ryleho Home Solutions Pty Ltd (voluntarily deregistered in September 2019). The third company on site Ryleho Group Pty Ltd now owned by his brother was sent into receivership by the Australian Tax Office - presumably for non-payment of taxes - in October 2019.

All three companies were involved in manufacturing timber products.

According to the last Register of Disclosures by Members of the Legislative Assembly form he lodged for 2018-19 Barilaro also has a beneficial interests in three trusts: the J & D Barilaro Family Trust, JJDA Trust and Kotsobola Group Unit Trust.

J & D Barilaro Family Trust conducted business at a location in NSW 2620 between August 2002 and the end of December 2019 according to the Australian Business Register (ABN) website. Presumably this trust was associated with Barilaro’s 50 per cent share in Ryleho Pty Ltd.

The JJDA Trust is associated with Domale Pty Ltd in which Barilaro’s wife has been sole director and company secretary since May 2010.

The Kotsobola Group Unit Trust is associated with Kotsobola Group Pty Ltd in which John Barilaro was one of four founding directors until March 2012 when his wife became a director in his place. This company’s purpose Barilaro described in 2014 as “Property Development”.

Another “Property Development” company Barilaro and his wife were at different time directors of was Euro Partners Pty Ltd. They appear to have been shareholders along with three other individuals up to the company’s reregistration in July 2016.

Barilaro’s Member’s Disclosure forms since entering state parliament also record he had held shares in at least five racehorses of which only two were currently listed in 2019.

Successive NSW Governments have believed that construction risks are best managed by builders - how wrong they were

This was the position of the NSW Liberal-Nationals O’Farrell Government in May 2013 after reviewing changes made to state building regulations and certification:

As the Government’s April 2013 White Paper – “A New Planning System for NSW” points out, building regulation and certification are a significant part of the NSW planning system.

The general outcomes that regulation and certification seek to secure are two-fold. First, a level of building performance consistent with the needs of an advanced society in terms of health, safety, amenity and sustainability and second, compliance consistent with planning expectations as defined by the planning system.

The current system of certification has evolved from the introduction of private certifiers in 1998, enabled by amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A) and Regulations. Following the 2002 Campbell Inquiry into the quality of buildings, administrative changes were put in place within the then Department of Urban Affairs and Planning for regulatory oversight of certifiers and in 2005 the Building Professionals Act established the Building Professionals Board (BPB), which took over this function.

Subsequently, there have been numerous legislative amendments and changes to regulations relating to certification. These have been essentially accretive and so the legislative framework has become unnecessarily complex and in some cases no longer relevant. With the establishment of a new planning system, the opportunity presents to take a fresh look at arrangements which have essentially developed as flow-ons from the last major reforms dating back to the 1979 commencement of the EP&A. Accordingly, the well established principles of developing regulatory systems that are efficient in an economic sense, as well as effective having regard to ease of administration, achievement of desired outcomes and minimizing the compliance burden, should now be applied……

It follows that improvements to building regulation must have regard to regulatory impacts such as cost and effective administration and ensure that certifier resources can cope with a higher level of activity.

However, regardless of the effectiveness of improvements that can be made to regulation, building construction risks are best managed by the builder and outcomes for consumers will depend on the clarity with which the roles and accountabilities of all the participants in the process are specified in statutes and regulations. [my yellow highlighting]

By 2013 private building certifiers were estimated as issuing at least 50 per cent of all building approvals, according the NSW Dept. of Planning & Industry.

In 2019 the wheels fell off this particular ill-advised policy change, with reports of private certifiers acting like cowboys and forced evacuations of defective, dangerously unstable multi-story apartment buildings.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 July 2019:

It gives me no pleasure, watching the looming disaster that is the NSW construction industry, to say we told you so  ("Toxic secret kept from unit owners", July 20-21).

In the early 2000s, along with my local government colleagues, we begged the NSW Government not to deregulate the supervision of building construction and give it over to private certifiers paid by the developers.

We warned it was putting the "fox in charge of the hen house" and would result in poor quality buildings that failed to comply.

Decades later successive state governments have ignored thousands of complaints from the community and numerous private certifiers declaring themselves bankrupt to avoid liability.

The industry is failing the consumer with all the benefits flowing to developers. The only real solution it to put government back in charge of regulation of the building construction process and that can only be done efficiently by a local authority. - Genia McCaffery, former president Local Government NSW

The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 July 2019:

Professional indemnity insurance premiums have skyrocketed following the discovery of severe defects at a string of apartment buildings in NSW and Victoria's flammable cladding problems, and other types of building insurance products are expected to follow.

Anthony Waldron: "I knew there were a lot of threatened species in Australia, but I didn't realise things were getting worse so quickly."

ABC News, 26 October 2017:

Koalas are one species under pressure in Australia.

(Supplied: WWF)

Australia is one of seven countries responsible for more than half of global biodiversity loss, according to a study published today.

Scientists based their findings on the worsening in conservation status of species between 1996 and 2008 on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list.

The IUCN red list uses a series of categories to rank how close a species is to extinction, from "least concern" through to "extinct in the wild".

Of the 109 countries studied, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, China and the United States (primarily Hawaii) also ranked inside the top seven as the worst offenders on conservation.

The researchers conceded that species native to multiple countries presented an obstacle to their calculations, but lead author Anthony Waldron says they were able to narrow down where the pressures were coming from.

"Once you actually work out [which country] might have been responsible for the loss of diversity, Australia is standing there at number two," Dr Waldron said.

"I knew there were a lot of threatened species in Australia, but I didn't realise things were getting worse so quickly."

Compared to Australia, which recorded a biodiversity loss of between 5 and 10 per cent of the total global decline, the study published in Nature found Indonesia had "absolutely the highest number of declining species", representing around 21 per cent of the total decline during the period.

Reduction in biodiversity was calculated by looking at species that had their IUCN red list upgraded during the period, such as from "least concern" to "threatened", or "vulnerable" to "endangered"……

Environmental sustainability professor Barry Brook from the University of Tasmania said there were a number of pressures threatening biodiversity in Australia.

"The predominant one is landclearing — ongoing clearing for habitat. New South Wales and Queensland have been particularly bad for that over the past two decades," Professor Brook said.

"[But] it's also what's known as 'lags' or 'extinction debt'. That's where you've had this historical change over many decades and it takes time for extinction to catch up as populations are reduced and fragmented and lose genetic diversity, then gradually fade away."

He said that spending on conservation is worthwhile when it involves preserving habitat or targeting pests.

"Native biodiversity is definitely improved by removing invasive plants and to a lesser extent invasive species."

Orange-bellied parrots are one of Australia's critically endangered species.

(ABC News: Caroline Winter)

BACKGROUND

Nature Magazine, Anthony Waldron  et al, Reductions in global biodiversity loss predicted from conservation spending, 25 October 2017

Administrative Appeals Tribunal asked to rule on Humane Society International FOI request

NSW Environmental Defender’s Office (EDO), 20 January 2017:

Humane Society International v Department of the Environment and Energy

Our client, Humane Society International (HSI), is seeking access to documents held by the Australian Department of the Environment and Energy on the adequacy of NSW’s biodiversity offsets policy for major projects ('the Policy').

HSI argues that the public has a right to know why the Australian Government believes, despite evidence to the contrary, that the NSW Policy meets national standards. On behalf of HSI, we are asking the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to find that it is in the public interest to release the documents under Freedom of Information laws. 

Background

Biodiversity offsets have become standard practice in the approval and assessment of major developments in Australia, even though there is little evidence that offset schemes achieve their intended purpose of protecting threatened species from extinction.

Biodiversity offsets allow developers such as mining companies to buy/manage land, or pay money into a fund, to compensate for the clearing of forests and areas containing threatened plants and animals.

Community groups such as HSI are concerned that the method for calculating biodiversity offsets in NSW, contained in the NSW Policy, does not properly protect the environment – including the plants and animals on the national list of threatened species and ecological communities.

The Australian Government, which is responsible for the national list of threatened species – and has international obligations to protect and conserve biodiversity in Australia – has stated that the NSW Policy meets national standards of environmental protection. However, analysis by EDOs of Australia shows clearly that the NSW policy provides weaker environmental protection than required under national environment policies.

With the Australian Government delegating more and more development approval powers to the states and territories under its ‘one stop shop’ policy, community groups fear that there will be fewer protections for our nationally threatened species and ecological communities.

HSI is therefore seeking access to documents detailing the Australian Government’s analysis of the NSW Policy. Access to this information is vital for the public to have confidence that important environmental protections are not being eroded.

Links

•        Offsets policies failing to protect threatened species, 5 May 2014
•        Federal handover of environmental approval powers to the states
•        NSW biodiversity offsets policy for major projects 

To stay in touch with news on this case and our other cases, sign up to our weekly eBulletin.

---

Help defend the environment
With your support, we can continue to help community groups like 4nature defend the environment. Please make a donation today.

Community anger over South Grafton asbestos contamination not allayed by public meeting

On Thursday 1 December 2016 Clarence Valley Council held a public meeting on the subject of its asbestos removal strategy during site remediation prior to re-development of the site as a 'super depot'.

Asbestos removal will reportedly add an est. $2.5 million to the re-development $13.3 million cost. 

The Daily Examiner, 5 December 2016, Clarence Valley Council depot site plan

The Daily Examiner, letter to the editor, 5 December 2016, p.12:

Inquiry needed

Last night I attended a meeting at the Clarence Valley Council chambers, where the public was invited to be updated about the asbestos that has been uncovered at the site of the new council depot in Tyson St.

The overwhelming emotion at the meeting was one of anger, as council's director of works attempted to explain away what many see as criminal culpability.

Last year, council management was warned by a former employee that over a long period of time broken asbestos material had been buried at the site. However, rather than properly address the issue, council opted to deny there was any problem, accusing those who spoke up on the matter of being trouble-makers, scaremongers and liars.

In an attempt to quell rising concern, council instructed a firm of specialists to undertake investigations at the site. However, those instructions were to test samples from stockpiles, omitting any request to search for buried material.

Of course nothing was found, which allowed council to release a media statement which your newspaper reported (March 8), under the banner headline "Council depot site clear of asbestos".

That story contained the unequivocal statement that: "Further testing of the site has reinforced earlier findings saying it poses no risk from asbestos."

Ultimately, of course, some two weeks after excavation work had commenced, asbestos was uncovered, and during those two weeks dust was observed rising from the works, while high school students carried on activities as usual just across the fence. Nearby residents also reported the dust settling on their homes and yards.

The general public learned of the asbestos discovery with the release of papers for council's November meeting, where we read the extraordinary admission that, "A quantity of asbestos containing material was always expected to be encountered on-site" - finally acknowledging that they knew it was there all the time.

The acknowledgement that they deliberately misled the public, potentially exposing residents and many hundreds of students to deadly asbestos is, in my opinion, criminal.

After discovering asbestos at the site, workers began sieving and stockpiling what the EPA later confirmed is contaminated material. The fact that the EPA didn't inspect the site until almost two weeks after the asbestos was uncovered should also be investigated.

During those two weeks, there was no public statement made, no warning signs were erected, and contrary to assurances by council that nearby property owners and the high school had been told, many residents claimed they had received no such advice.

An assurance at the meeting that air quality is now being monitored, and that levels of whatever is floating around in the air are within guidelines, is hardly comforting, and there was no explanation of what particulate matter is being inhaled by those unfortunate enough to live or study in close proximity to the works.

One thing is certain, that anger will remain until digging up more polluted material is halted, the contaminated material is safely removed as required under the law, and a full inquiry held into how this whole shameful debacle was ever allowed to occur.

John Edwards

The Daily Examiner, 5 December 2016:

WORK on the Clarence Valley Council's $13 million super depot should stop immediately following the discovery of about 900kg of bonded asbestos on the site, say South Grafton residents.

At a public meeting on Thursday, called to discuss the issue, South Grafton resident Mark Butler said work should cease until further extensive testing on the site was done.

Mr Butler, who can see the depot 500m from his house in Moorehead Dr, said there needed to be deep core drilling of the entire site to discover the amount of asbestos that had been dumped on the site.

He described the initial testing as flawed because it was only done on selected parts of the site.

"Basically the council was saying drill here, drill there and, when they didn't find anything, they went ahead with it," Mr Butler said.

"But anecdotally lots of people knew there had been asbestos dumped at the site for more than 40 years.

"And now they've been proven right."

Mr Butler said the council should consider closing the site and completely sealing it, if it turned out there was more asbestos there than had been uncovered.

"Basically (the) council does not know what's there and, until they do, they should stop work and do more testing to find out.

"There's always been problems with the way the council pushed this depot through, but we've got to this point.

"Now they have to make sure what they do from now on does not create a medical emergency."

Mr Butler was critical of the way the council ran the public meeting, but said it did give residents a chance to have their say.

"The feeling I got was the council was trying to control it and tried to shut down any difficult questions," Mr Butler said.

Clarence Valley Mayor Jim Simmons was at the meeting and shared the concerns of residents, especially the worries about the proximity to South Grafton High School.

"At least we should look at stopping work until the start of the school holidays," Cr Simmons said.

The mayor was also surprised to learn the contractors, Hutchinsons Builders, had not installed air monitoring stations beyond the boundaries of the site on the corner of Rushforth Rd and Tyson St.

"I don't understand why they haven't done that," he said.

However, Cr Simmons was confident the contractors had the expertise to deal with the find.

Cr Simmons said the absence of the Environmental Protection Agency from the meeting had concerned him.

"I understand they had their reasons ... but I plan to get in contact with them," he said.

He was also surprised spokespeople from other government agencies, like WorkSafe, did not have more input at the meeting.

The mayor said the council owned the site and was obliged to remediate it.

"We would have had to fix it up whether or not there was a depot going on it," he said.

"There was a lot of emotion at that meeting, perhaps rightly so.

"Council needs to address their concerns about the asbestos on the site and also the dust which is blowing onto the properties."

BACKGROUND

WorkCover NSW, Fact Sheet, Bonded Asbestos:

WHAT IS BONDED ASBESTOS?

When asbestos fibres are bonded to another material, such as a cement or resin binder, it is known as bonded asbestos. It cannot be crumbled, pulverised or reduced to a powder by hand pressure when dry. Common uses in buildings include: flat (fibro), corrugated or compressed asbestos-cement (AC) sheeting; water, drainage and flue pipes and floor tiles.

If fire, hail, or illegal water blasting damages bonded asbestos, it may become friable asbestos material. A WorkCover licensed friable asbestos removalist must always carry out the removal of friable asbestos. They must also obtain a site-specific permit from WorkCover to carry out this type of work.

A WorkCover asbestos licence is required to remove 10 square metres or more of bonded asbestos (the size of a small bathroom). The reduction will result in more situations where a licence is required to remove bonded asbestos in NSW. The requirements for friable asbestos are unchanged….

A licence holder with a bonded asbestos removal licence can remove any amount of bonded asbestos provided they notify WorkCover at least seven days before commencing work. Bonded asbestos licence holders are not allowed to remove, repair or disturb any amount of friable asbestos.

Clarence Valley Independent, 9 November 2016:

The map provided to John Edwards, which purports to be a representation of a map given to Clarence Valley Council (CVC) by a former employee, who raised concerns that broken asbestos pipes were dumped within the top red circle and in other areas (not marked) at the site of the new CVC depot at South Grafton. Image: Contributed.

Clarence Valley Council (CVC) has released a map that marks where asbestos was allegedly buried at the site of the new ‘super’ depot under construction at Tyson Street, South Grafton.

The Clarence Environment Centre’s John Edwards was given the map after an appeal against CVC’s rejection of his formal GIPA (Government Information (Public Access)).

A former employee alerted the council, last year, regarding his concerns that fill placed at the site following the decommissioning of the sewerage treatment plant (STP) may have included broken asbestos pipes.

The man told the Independent that he had given the original map to council; and his main concern was the STP’s former sludge lagoon, which is marked on the map given to Mr Edwards.

The former employee said the lagoon was filled over an 18-month to two-year period in the late 1980s or early 1990s.

He said many truckloads of fill, which may have included broken concrete asbestos pipes, building waste and other rubble, were put into the hole, which was then covered with “two to three foot of top soil”…..

Looking at the various public documents – the site’s remediation action plan and supplementary soil investigations prepared by consultants WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff – it’s not clear where or how deep test holes/pits were dug.

A letter and map advising of supplementary soil investigations does not appear to concur with an email (obtained via Mr Edward’s GIPA) from the council’s water cycle manager, Greg Mashiah, to WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff.

Mr Mashiah’s email requests that “four additional test pits to be sampled; 2 in each circle”, which are marked in red with a cross on the supplied map – the one beneath the ‘former sludge pond’ was concerned with possible buried jars of mercury…..

Clarence Valley councillors at work post 2016 local government election - everything old is back again

Clarence Valley Council considered Item 14.094/16 DA2016/0281 on 18 October 2016 – A Rotational Outdoor Free Range Piggery upon Lot 51 DP751382, 550 Tullymorgan Road, Lawrence .

The 161ha property at 550 Tullymorgan Road, circa April 2016:

[Images of the property which is currently listed for sale at realestate.com.au and was listed in The Daily Examiner in April 2016]

This current application by the Sisson Family Trust is for a 75 sow piggery producing up to 1,500 piglets each year.  A Council staff member is the landowner and presumably a potential beneficiary of the trust.

Bravo to Cr. Greg Clancy for pointing out during the debate the manifest deficiencies in both the applicant & council’s approach to this development application to date.

The site inspection for the purposes of environmental assessment completed on 23 July 2016 only lasting approx. 2 hours which were spent inspecting areas of the site by vehicle and allegedly on foot, including areas proposed for pig paddocks, areas within the 100m buffer to natural waterbodies and bushland in the northern part of the site where pig grazing is not proposed.

Cr. Peter Ellem agreed more rigour should be exercised in the area of environmental/
threatened species assessments. Cr. Andrew Baker urged further expert opinion on EP& A provisions pertaining to the development. 

The Grafton putsch left over from the last council term was gung-ho for approval forthwith and for cutting “red tape”.  In the process putsch member Cr. Lysault demonstrated his ignorance of animal husbandry and farming practices.

Disappointingly this development application received what some would still consider premature consent - with Mayor Jim Simmons, Deputy Mayor Jason Kingsley, Cr. Arthur Lysault, Cr. Richie Williamson  and, first-time councillor Debrah Novak, voting in favour of an application which by council's own admission contained not one contemporary, detailed on the ground flora & fauna field study.

Then there is the matter of the vote in the Chamber.

When the previous council considered this development application at the ordinary meeting of 9 August 2016 there were two declarations of interest by councillors:

By the 18 October ordinary meeting those declarations of interest had shrunk to none registered by Cr. Simmons and apparently downgraded to a Non-Significant Non Pecuniary interest on the part of Cr. Kingsley, allowing both to remain in the Chamber for consideration of and vote in relation to a larger piggery being established on land owned by a member of Clarence Valley Council staff.

In fact the participation of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor in this 5 to 3 vote allowed consent to be granted without further ado:

One would have thought that given the landowner is employed by council and both Crs. Simmons and Kingsley had previously declared an interest a mere ten weeks ago, as newly appointed mayor and deputy mayor they would have exercised an abundance of caution and again excused themselves from considering this item to avoid even a perception of potential bias in favour of the landowner.

Old habits are not necessarily good habits and I hope this newly-elected council will approach the matter of pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests with more diligence over the next four years.

Australian Federal Election 2016: right-wing propaganda running wild

This scare campaign is looking suspiciously as though it is being made up as the proponents go along.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 May 2016:

Research intended for use in a bid to discredit Labor's negative gearing campaign was commissioned after a meeting between Scott Morrison and a close friend and senior figure in Australia's property industry.

But the draft report contains a series of factual errors and makes bold claims of a "resale price cliff" and "social dysfunction" that have alarmed some in the real estate industry to whom it has been circulated.

An email obtained by Fairfax Media shows Greg Paramor, the managing director of property company Folkestone, discussed the need for a study critiqueing Labor's policy with Brian Haratsis, the executive chairman of advisory firm MacroPlan Dimasi. Mr Paramor, who is a friend of Mr Morrison and former president of the Australian Property Council, made the request after his encounter with the Treasurer.

"Greg recently had the opportunity to meet with The Hon. Scott Morrison to discuss negative gearing," the email notes. "As a result of that meeting, Greg agreed to provide a report to the Treasurer – he asked Brian Haratsis to undertake a study on the impact of the proposed negative gearing changes."

The email, sent from an unnamed person inside Mr Paramor's company, was sent to senior industry figures last week.

It also asks for feedback as "the Treasurer is keen to get the report next week".

Entitled "Short Memory: Negative Gearing and Capital Gains Tax: Foundations of the New Australian Housing Model," the attached draft report is also presented with an alternative title: "Shortened Memory".

It claims Labor's policy would remove 205,000 dwellings from the rental housing stock over a decade, adding to housing stress. Asked why removing dwellings from the rental stock would add to housing stress when the dwellings would still be available for use, Mr Haratsis said the phrase was meant to refer to low-income rental dwellings.

Illustration: Ron Tandberg

The draft says Labor's policy would both make housing less affordable and create a "resale price cliff" as large numbers of apartments were sold at a loss. Mr Haratsis explained the apparent contradiction by saying the market was bifurcated and that different parts of it would react differently….

The Treasurer's office denied he had asked for a report to be prepared or that he or his office had received copies.

The report also says Australian governments would need to stump up an extra $3.3 billion per year for social housing and rent assistance should Labor's policy became law, more than the $3.2 billion per year it would raise.

The total economic cost of Labor's policy would be $5 billion per year, a reference Mr Haratsis said has since been removed from the document after acknowledging that it was arrived at by adding up payments without subtracting receipts.

"I am writing this as we go, and there are a number of references that you are looking at that won't be there in the final," he said. "I want to go back and recalculate the numbers."

Prepared in haste with what appears to have been a speech recognition program, the draft at one point refers to Labor's promise to "grandfather" the entitlements of existing investors as a promise to create "ground furthered" properties.

The leaking of the report potentially blunts another avenue of attack on Labor's plan to restrict negative gearing to new properties only and halve the capital gains tax discount to 25 per cent, which has been the subject of a fierce government scare campaign.

Mr Haratsis insisted it was his decision to initiate the report after his meeting with Mr Paramor, that he would fund the work himself and that it was planned for release next week - at which point "I could maybe give it to the Treasurer".

The report critiques organisations such as the Grattan Institute, which engages in "Robin Hood economics" and chooses to "ostracise high income individuals" instead of focusing on tax efficiency.

Short Memory Alternative Title – Shortened Memory by The Guardian