Gillman Land Sale

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:50): My question, again, is to the Treasurer. Does the Treasurer still believe that this deal at Gillman was in the best interests of South Australians given that the current Chief Executive of Renewal SA John Hanlon's comments in the report state:

I think it's an extraordinary transaction to make. They quite successfully tied up 10 years worth of competition. It is just an extraordinary way of tying up your asset. It's an extraordinary transaction that you do question why there does not seem to be a benefit. There is no benefit to the state in relation to this.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (14:51): We do stand by our decision about this being a good deal for South Australia. The narrow perspective of a land disposal body about maximising the value of land and the price of a piece of land—and I think, frankly, the erroneous chain of reasoning about the effect on landfill competitors—is something we just do not accept. We understood those arguments and we understand those arguments; we just do not accept them.

As I said before when I was asked this question on public radio today, public servants advise and governments decide, and it is the province of the cabinet to make these decisions. One of the recommendations that we are going to have to reflect upon is this whole question of the relationship between the way in which we do in fact dispose of land.

In the past, LMC was very much a land disposal body, and there is a lot of the old LMC culture left in Renewal SA. The truth is that we are seeking to take parcels of land now and use them for other and more strategic purposes—purposes which are more than just about flogging land and maximising its value, and that is what the cabinet was trying to do here.

The truth is that we have run into a bit of difficulty with the old culture of Renewal SA colliding with the ambitions of the cabinet about using this land for strategic purposes, and we are going to have to review the government's arrangements from that perspective. But, no, it is a different perspective and he is entitled to that view. We just don't share it.