GLENTHORNE FARM

Mr HANNA (Mitchell) (15:03): Will the Premier rule out urban development on the land known as Glenthorne Farm and, if not, why not? Glenthorne Farm in my electorate was given to the University of Adelaide on trust after the state of South Australia paid $7 million to the commonwealth. The trust deed, signed on behalf of the state government and the university, forbids the university from allowing or even seeking urban development on the land.

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (15:03): I have fond memories of days gone by when the member was a candidate for the Labor Party. That was before he was a member of parliament for the Labor Party, before he was a member for the Greens and before he was a candidate with Mr Xenophon's support, now as an Independent. I remember standing there at Glenthorne—

Ms Chapman: He got smart.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Pardon?

Ms Chapman: He got smart and got out.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.D. RANN: I remember standing by the road in front of Glenthorne as we fought against what was going to be some kind of developers' Panzer division that would have ripped up Glenthorne which I wanted to see—and I still want to see—as a shining, glimmering green belt in the midst of our city and which is in a crucial part—

The Hon. K.O. Foley: The lungs of the south.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: The lungs—exactly. The Deputy Premier is a person whose environmental credentials are renowned. In fact, I noticed that he was again being featured for his dolphin sanctuary and the baby dolphin called Hope. So, the lungs of the south. I would like to see Glenthorne developed into one of my urban forests. Indeed, as members would know, we are planting 3 million trees throughout the city.

The University of Adelaide purchased Glenthorne from the CSIRO with a state government grant of $7 million (under the previous government), which was the value of the land if it were to be developed for housing. The land was to remain as open space and be used for a vineyard and other viticultural ventures, with the profits to assist wine industry-related research. A deed of agreement between the university, the government and the Winemakers Federation, representing the wine industry, governs the use of the grant, the land and the proceeds of the land. The university experienced difficulties in finalising the vineyard proposal due to downturns in the wine industry and an oversupply of grapes.

Pursuant to the deed, the university is required to submit a concept plan and an initial business plan for Glenthorne. In late 2006 the university submitted a concept plan (known as 'the 2006 plan') which was refused, as it included housing and therefore did not meet the requirements of the deed or the land management agreement. We would not countenance it at the time. In late 2007 the university submitted a revised concept plan ('the 2007 plan'), which proposed the gradual development of a significant urban woodlands regeneration and maintenance research project on Glenthorne, as funding allowed, with agricultural activities continuing in the meantime. In April 2008 the government accepted the 2007 plan, subject to the provision of further detail and preparation of an initial business plan.

During 2008 the university extended its proposal, and on 18 June 2008 announced 'a world-class project to…revegetate the Mount Lofty Ranges, to stave off the effects of climate change and halt the loss of bird, animal and plant species', and that Glenthorne 'will play a pivotal role in delivering these outcomes'. Such a major initiative would require major funding. and the university advised of its intention to establish the Glenthorne Trust Fund and that it was considering possible funding sources.

On 30 September 2008 the university submitted its further revised concept plan and initial business plan for approval, and these documents include a housing or housing/commercial development to fund the woodland recovery initiative. The 2008 plan is therefore not in accordance with the 2007 plan, which was conditionally approved in April 2008, and does not meet the requirements of the deed or the land management agreement.

So, to recap: the government has refused housing on the site and has approved a plan without any housing subject to provision of additional detail and a suitable business plan. The government has not given consideration to allow housing on this site, but will await with interest community views on the latest proposal by the university, which is now undertaking a consultation process. Obviously, as the honourable member who asked the question (and who, I understand, is listening to me) would know, this government would like to listen to the views of the community; that is the way it operates, because Labor listens.