SHOP TRADING HOURS (RUNDLE MALL TOURIST PRECINCT) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 25 November 2010.)

Mr BIGNELL (Mawson) (11:16): I rise to finish my contribution on this matter, which I started at the end of last year. There have been a few public holidays between the start of the speech and the end of the speech, and I would like to point out, being down in the electorate of Mawson, that it was wonderful to see so many people down there enjoying their public holidays. McLaren Vale and the surrounding beaches really are a great part of the world, and in the period over Christmas and the New Year it was almost impossible to get in for lunch at a lot of the restaurants because people were out there enjoying their time together with their friends and families. That is a really important part of life. It is not all about work and it is not all about shopping; and I think Christmas time, in particular, is a very good time for people to come together.

I will not reiterate everything I said at the beginning of my speech, but I have mentioned that Paris is the world's most visited city, yet it does not allow Sunday trading. So shopping is not the be all and end all of the tourism experience. We have fantastic tourism experiences in South Australia, and I do not think people will come to Adelaide for a trip based on whether or not Rundle Mall is open.

I also think that perhaps the mall could have a look at the environment there; there is certainly some room for improvement. I like the mall, I like the balls, and I like the pigs, but it is quite a noisy place with all the spruikers and PA systems—people playing electric guitar. I think something could be done to make it a bit more of a pleasant place to be.

I met with the Lord Mayor recently, and I like the work he is doing to try to encourage people to come to the mall in that period between 4 o'clock in the afternoon and 7 o'clock at night. I think that is a good thing to try to encourage, and his thoughts on that are that, if you get people there in between the shops closing and the restaurants opening, then you actually extend that time out and create a more vibrant city. That would actually go for Monday to Thursday every week of the year, apart from public holidays. So you would spread the trading hours and profitability. The companies would get a lot more out of his idea than they would just looking after a few public holidays each year.

I congratulate the new Lord Mayor on his election win. I know he has many visions, and I wish him the very best with all those. As I said at the outset of this speech, I do not support this at all.

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:19): I certainly support the measure that has been brought before the house by the member for Adelaide. Just on a couple of the comments the member for Mawson made about people down in his electorate in the Vales on public holidays; I am absolutely certain that those people would not have bothered going down to the Vales if they could not go into a restaurant, a café or a cellar door. There are indeed people—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: But they can.

Mr WILLIAMS: Absolutely; they can, because those businesses are operating on a Sunday or a public holiday. That is the point.

Mr PENGILLY: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I just ask that the minister goes to his seat if he wishes to make comment, instead of from down here?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That point of order can be upheld, I suppose, yes. Minister, if you wish to interject, please do it from your chair. Would you like to interject? I know you care about these things.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No; from his special seat. We will waste no more time. Member for MacKillop.

Mr WILLIAMS: I thank the minister for helping me make my point that those people who enjoy going to places like the Vales do so because people and businesses are prepared to work and remain open on public holidays. That is the very point. I thank both the member for Mawson, for making that point, and the minister, for helping to reinforce that point.

This set of regulations in South Australia are the most draconian shopping laws anywhere in this nation. I had the pleasure of being the shadow spokesperson for industrial relations a few years ago. I remember going through this particular question. I remember doing up a spreadsheet of all the other capital cities across Australia. Adelaide has the most restrictive trading hours anywhere in this nation, and we need to ask ourselves why we would do that.

Why would we again impose restrictions in metropolitan Adelaide which do not apply to the rest of South Australia? I happen to know that, throughout all of South Australia, outside of the metropolitan area, there is only one community where there are restrictions on shopping hours—only one—which happens to be Millicent, my home town. It is the only community, other than Adelaide, in the whole of this state that restricts shopping hours. There were previously similar restrictions in Port Lincoln, but they were overturned by the local community about 18 months or two years ago.

The reality is that, as a parliament, we sensibly overturned these regulations with regard to Jetty Road—that tourism strip down at the Bay—for very good reason. The member for Adelaide—the new member for Adelaide, because the people of Adelaide decided that the old member for Adelaide was not representing their interests—has brought on this matter, recognising that this is just as important to the tourism industry of this state as it is to Jetty Road, and she wishes to very sensibly overturn these regulations with regard to the Rundle Mall precinct because of the tourism industry.

We know that the tourism industry in this state is not doing nearly as well as it should be; it is not doing nearly as well as it is in the other states. I am not saying that this would be the be all and end all, the silver bullet, to recovering the tourism industry. We all know and, as the member for Mawson said, if you go to the Vales on a public holiday, there are lots of people there enjoying themselves. If you go down to Jetty Road on a public holiday, there are lots of people there enjoying themselves. If you come to Rundle Mall, where the greatest investment in retail has been made by some very progressive business people, it is dead. One reason is that, as a parliament, we say that consenting adults cannot trade on a public holiday in Rundle Mall. It is a nonsense.

I fully support the member for Adelaide for bringing this matter before the house, and I urge the house to support her. I lament that the SDA has taken even more control of the current government. This is the way this government works. It has nothing to do with them discussing it in caucus and coming to a sensible decision; it is about taking a phone call from the SDA, and then them all bowing to the wants and desires of that particular organisation.

So, unfortunately, I think this bill may not receive the support that it deserves; it does thoroughly deserve it. It is a nonsense to suggest that we should have these regulations in probably the most important tourism precinct in South Australia, yet we do not do it at Jetty Road. I will conclude my remarks.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Food Marketing) (11:24): I just wanted to say a few words in relation to this matter because some of the argument in favour of this has been essentially put under the banner of tourism, which, of course, is a matter that is of some interest to me. I just wanted to say a few words about this. The first thing I wanted to say is that, in as much as tourism is the genuine driver for this matter, members would be aware that there is already provision within the legislation for some flexibility. Indeed, on 20 February, tens of shops in the mall are going to be open at 9am to allow passengers coming into Port Adelaide on two cruise ships, the Amadea and the Queen Mary 2, to have an opportunity to shop in the city centre.

So, when we have what is demonstrably a tourism event, the legislation already provides an opportunity for that event to be catered for by retailers in the city. If that is the point that the honourable member is making, the good news is, those events are already covered; it already happens and the flexibility already exists. Everybody is happy about that.

What is being proposed here is that we actually, as I read the draft bill, are going to create a thing called the Rundle Mall Tourist Precinct, which presupposes that the Rundle Mall is somehow more significant as a tourist precinct than O'Connell Street, for example, or more significant than Tea Tree Plaza, or more significant than The Parade.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members on my left, I think you—excuse me, member for Morialta—I think you will find that during your contributions the members on my right actually listened to you; so you can do the same thing. Thank you.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Finniss!

Mr Pengilly: Hello!

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, that's completely inappropriate behaviour. It is a completely inappropriate way to address the chair, and if you carry on like that, I will just ask you to leave.

Mr Pengilly: There you go.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That was also inappropriate. Everybody's inappropriate. Okay, carry on.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, if tourism is the genuine issue here, I have already explained that for a particular tourism event such as the arrival of large cruise ships the matter is already being dealt with under the existing regime. If it is to say the Rundle Mall is a particularly significant tourism area, I would ask rhetorically—and I do not want an answer, the member for Norwood—why The Parade should not also be, why every other area should not also be. The answer, of course, is that this is a stalking horse, a Trojan horse, an argument, a battering ram, I do not care what you want to call it, but it is not about tourism. It is not about the significance of tourism—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Once again, I draw your attention to the standing orders. Member for Norwood, you seem to have the disease of the member for Finniss—and it is an unattractive disease.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! We are not going to start again until people have stopped talking.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am trying to be temperate in my remarks and if members opposite do not want to hear what I have to say, I can only assume that is because they find it uncomfortable. So, can I please get on with—

Mr PENGILLY: On a point of order: it is not a question of not wanting to hear what the minister says, it is a matter of listening to the nonsense that is emanating from his lips.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, as the member for Finniss well knows.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: It is interesting the member for Finniss mentions nonsense. As far as nonsense goes, he would have to be in the grand final, wouldn't he? I defer to the honourable member on the subject of nonsense. I will try and depart from what is his natural turf.

As I was saying, whether you call it a Trojan horse, a battering ram, a stalking horse, I do not care. There are all sorts of analogies you can use, but the point is simply this: this bill is an attempt to play around with that old chestnut called shopping hours. That is what it is, pure and simple. If they want to have a debate about shopping hours, have a debate about shopping hours, call it what it is, but do not put it under this sort of little wrap and label it 'Rundle Mall', because that is not what this is about. So, if we are going to have a debate about shopping hours, I am fine about that. That is fine, but let's have an honest debate about it. Let's not be cute and use this little device as a proxy vehicle for having a debate about shopping hours.

The other thing that members might be interested to know is that there is a group in the city—and I am sure that the member for Adelaide is well aware of this group—called the Rundle Mall Management Authority. That group represents people whose businesses and livelihoods are tied up in the Rundle Mall. These are people who have invested their own money and their family's money, and their family's future, in running a business in the Rundle Mall. And, guess what? They are not asking for this.

An honourable member: Have you spoken to them?

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Yes, I have.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The time for debate on this matter is over. Perhaps everybody could go outside and have this conversation.

Debate adjourned.