House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Gillman Land Sale Gillman Land Sale Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg Deputy Leader of the Opposition Gillman Land Sale Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:47): A supplementary. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Before we go to that supplementary, I call to order the member for Mount Gambier, I warn the member for Stuart for the first time and I warn, for the second and final time, the deputy leader, the member for Kavel and the member for Stuart. Deputy leader. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: My question is to the minister. Who then will be the arbiter of whether ACP are acting expeditiously or in good faith, who will determine that? If it is you as the minister, what date do you say they have to have it done by to ensure that this deed proceeds? The Hon. J.R. RAU House of Assembly Enfield Deputy Premier Attorney-General Minister for Justice Reform Minister for Planning Minister for Housing and Urban Development Minister for Industrial Relations Minister for Child Protection Reform The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform) (14:47): The position is basically this: under the agreement—and this is not an unusual proposition for commercial agreements—if the parties come to the point where they have a difference of opinion about whether one of them has lived up to their obligations under the agreement, there is a provision within the agreement for an independent arbitration of that particular matter. I am not ultimately the umpire of whether or not there has been compliance. As you would expect in a complex agreement of this type, there is provision, that the parties have made in advance in the event of there being some confusion or disagreement between the parties, that there would be a process by which any such disagreement would be resolved. That is the case in an agreement such as this. As to whether or not the government would actually activate that provision, that would ultimately be a matter for the government to determine, whether or not the government considered there had been compliance or noncompliance. Of course, before getting to that point we would be in a position to provide the appropriate notices and information, as also required by the agreement, so that there was no question of the parties operating under some misapprehension or anything of that sort.