Recent allegations in the Parliament, specifically by Mr Latham, the member for Werriwa, that a development application lodged at Pittwater Council shows that I have some beneficial interest in my husband's property at Clareville (also referred to as Pittwater) are as baseless as they are desperate.
My husband has already said in public statements that "the property is owned by me and at no time has Helen had any proprietary interest in it" and that "Helen has not put one dollar into the property. She has no equitable or beneficial interest in the property and I reject absolutely any suggestion to the contrary."
I have already said in a public statement "Labor's claims revolve around a property belonging to my husband in Clareville in which I have no interest and in which I have never had an interest."
There are primary documents that show beyond any room for argument that my husband is the sole owner of the Clareville property and that he and he alone has the legal capacity to deal with the property.
The building contract shows my husband as the proprietor and bears his signature. There is a letter dated 23 March 1994 from the Chief Building Surveyor of Pittwater Council to my husband acknowledging receipt of a building application from him.
There is a Notice of Practical Completion issued by the architect to the proprietor, Andrew Rogers. There is a receipt issued from Pittwater Council dated 3 April 1998 describing my husband as the owner.
There are several Valuer-General's Notices issued to my husband. Obviously there are council rates notices with my husband's name as the owner of the property.
I have never claimed to be entitled to deal with the property and cannot be held responsible if landscapers or others dealing with the property may have wrongly assumed that as the wife of Andrew Rogers I should be referred to as Helen Rogers.
What Mr Latham tabled in the House of Representatives is, on closer inspection, a landscape gardening plan to be linked to the building application. There is also, apparently, an application for demolition with the name Helen Rogers crossed out.
There has also been a reference to Pittwater Council minutes. I have never attended any Pittwater Council meeting. My husband attended on his own behalf.
None of these documents have been signed or approved by me.
The conclusive proof of my husband's sole interest in the building of a new dwelling at Clareville is in the building contract, and the acknowledgment of the building application by Pittwater Council from the chief building surveyor addressed solely to my husband which commences "Dear Owner" and refers exclusively to his application.
The Member for Werriwa tabled some selective documents supposedly obtained from Pittwater Council.
A range of primary documents from Pittwater Council, in particular those bearing my husband's signature, clearly show the sole proprietor of the property is my husband.
Why did Mr Latham ignore these primary documents?
I attach documents from Pittwater Council, which clearly show that my husband is the sole owner of the property and the only person interested in the contract and building application.