House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Adelaide Oval ADELAIDE OVAL The Hon. I.F. EVANS House of Assembly Davenport ADELAIDE OVAL The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (14:46): My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer advise the house whether he has been informed that the estimated cost of the footbridge over the River Torrens, proposed as part of the Adelaide Oval redevelopment and broader development, has increased from an estimated $20 million to more than $38 million, and what is the latest cost of the bridge? The Hon. K.O. FOLEY House of Assembly Port Adelaide Deputy Premier Minister for Federal/State Relations Minister for Defence Industries ADELAIDE OVAL The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Treasurer, Minister for Federal/State Relations, Minister for Defence Industries) (14:46): The deputy leader is correct in that the cost of the bridge has ballooned to an extent that in the last version of what the Premier and I were shown it was a rather large structure, and it was suggested that— The Hon. P.F. Conlon House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. Conlon: Six lanes wide. The Hon. K.O. FOLEY House of Assembly The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I thought it was the beginning of the Southern Expressway about 100 kilometres closer to the city. I thought Bignell had pulled a swiftie on me and got the freeway starting in the city going all the way to the southern suburbs. It was suggested to the architects that that was a tad wider and larger than what we thought—as engineers ourselves—it should be. We do not have a final cost on that but, when we do, when we settle on— The Hon. I.F. Evans interjecting: The Hon. K.O. FOLEY House of Assembly The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: No, I will be upfront about the footbridge, as I have been with everything else. The initial design for the footbridge was for a far too small structure. Following the advice of architects and engineers that have been employed since the project was contemplated, we, in fact, need a much larger, more structurally sound bridge, because there could be as many as 25,000 to 30,000 people storming out of a game after a Power win. What they have done is gone from the sublime to the ridiculous—from the very small to too large. So it has gone out by some tens of millions, but that will come back. The Hon. P.F. Conlon interjecting: The Hon. K.O. FOLEY House of Assembly The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: As the Minister for Infrastructure said, we have not even, as yet, finalised the location of the bridge in respect of where it will land on this side of the river, whether it is by the railway station or— The Hon. P.F. Conlon House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. Conlon: It will be designed as part of the precinct, not as part of the stadium. The Hon. K.O. FOLEY House of Assembly The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: As the minister says, because of the precinct design and the fact that we are nearly doubling the size of the convention centre and putting in place serious works to bring to life the cafe, restaurant and bar culture of that area, and whatever may happen with the Casino, it really is a precinct concern and where it lands will be as much for the precinct as it will for the oval. So, I do not disagree with the deputy leader, but what I am saying is that this is part of further work to be undertaken to get a more realistic cost and a more realistic design of the bridge.