The Canberra director of development company Knight Frank has raised concerns as to how his company's name ended up sending a submission to an inquiry panel supporting the proposed waste plastic to fuel facility in Hume.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Greg Cummins said the company has no records as to who sent in the submission backing the controversial proposal to the inquiry, which is also word-for-word identical with submissions from three other Canberra businesses.
Businesses including law firm Meyer Vandenberg, Affinity Electrical and construction company Nikias Diamond all made submissions to the panel in support of the plan.
However, while the companies all made submissions at different times during the submission period, all four contained word-for-word identical statements in support of Foy Group, the company behind the proposal.
The submissions all read: "I write in support of the proposed Foy waste plastic to fuel facility in Hume ACT, of course, subject to your findings about its human health safety.
"The ACT economy needs diversified employment opportunities and this proposal brings manufacturing capabilities to the ACT generating over 100 ongoing jobs. The proposal supports the ACT's waste strategy and contributes to its reputation as an international city that is open for business.
"The facility is to be located in Hume, an area zoned for industrial uses which is the most appropriate area for it to be located."
The identical submissions were all made at various times, ranging from March 6 to April 7.
Mr Cummins said no one in Frank Knight's Canberra office has said they wrote the submission on the company's behalf.
"Nobody is owning up to it," he said.
"I wouldn't be surprised if someone else has used our name in vain. We've never spoken to Foy before."
As well as the four businesses, a submission was also made by the Canberra Innovation network by its newly-appointed chief executive Petr Adamek.
The network's submission also contained several phrases identical to those made by the Canberra businesses, however, it also contained two paragraphs of original material.
Out of the 91 submissions made public, eight were in support of the proposal.
The inquiry panel was established in February to examine Foy's proposal for the facility, which would see 200 tonnes of waste plastic a day converted into fuel.
When asked by The Canberra Times about the nature of the identical submissions, both Meyer Vandenberg and Nikias Diamond declined to comment.
Founder of Affinity Electrical Brendan Read said he was not aware the submission he made to the inquiry panel was identical to that of three others.
"I don't know how that would be. My submission was only a couple of sentences long," he said.
"Canberra needs some industry rather than people that just sit behind a desk."
In a statement, Foy's managing director Stuart Clark said while Foy briefed a number of Canberra businesses during the consultation period, the company or employees do not have connections with the businesses behind the identical submissions.
"We obviously do not have the authority to instruct other businesses as to what recommendations they should make," he said.
"The fact that the businesses have chosen to use similar wording seems insignificant in the context of the letters being bona fide support from independent third parties."
A spokeswoman for the Environmental and Planning Directorate said analysis of submissions to the inquiry panel is limited to identifying common themes.
"Multiple submissions containing identical words can still be legitimately considered as separate submissions if they are made by separate legal entities.
