House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Multiple Land Use Multiple Land Use Mr ODENWALDER House of Assembly Little Para Multiple Land Use Mr ODENWALDER (Little Para) (14:18): My question is to the Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy. Can the minister inform the house of the government's approach to multiple land use and if he is aware of any alternative views? The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly West Torrens Minister for Finance Minister for State Development Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy Minister for Small Business Multiple Land Use The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Treasurer, Minister for Finance, Minister for State Development, Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy, Minister for Small Business) (14:18): I thank the member for his question and for the continued support for a balanced approach to land use in South Australia that enables our economy to continue to benefit from our twin strengths in agriculture and resources. The framework that supports multiple land use firstly acknowledges that conflict can arise between sectors. Here in South Australia we already require stakeholder engagement and fair compensation for land use and access. Our state's economy evolves to contemplate broader land use options, and I accept that we can improve on past experience to ensure that government, community, business and industry adopt leading principles for engagement. Our guiding principles are accountability, best use of assets, co-existence, efficient processes, evidence based, equity, participation of all stakeholders and shared commitment in a way that we can maximise the benefits to South Australians of our rich endowment of natural resources. It is therefore important that we encourage the view that multiple land use is desirable and in the best interests of all South Australians. Yes, it is a balance, but it is a balance that is backed by good policy shared with the South Australian community for their feedback which allows us to embrace world's best practice here at home. In the absence of good policy the community is vulnerable to misinformation and scare campaigns. Good policy designs demand leadership, and unfortunately there are those who released no resources and energy policy before the election and no resources policy since the election. Where there is a policy vacuum— Members interjecting: The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: —petty populism— Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: Point of order. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: I imagine that the member for Morialta is distressed by the level of interjections, as I am. Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: Well, that, and 98. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The solution to a minister debating and the opposition roaring at him is to let the play flow. Minister. The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Where there is a policy vacuum petty populism is given free reign, flapping around in the breeze to be carried by the chill winds of Lock the Gate and Right to Farm propagandists. And so it has been left to Liberal MP Rowan Ramsey, the federal member for Grey, to come up with his own policy on a fundamentally state's rights issue. So what is the Liberal member for Grey proposing? In his seven page discussion paper—seven more than the Leader of the Opposition—the rural Liberal MP for South Australia has devised the Rowan Ramsey rural ransom option. In a sop to the Lock the Gate and Right to Farm movement, he suggests resource companies should be forced to pay a protected minimum offer when seeking access to land. The Ramsey rural ransom option sets the PMO minimum offer at three times an independent valuation of the property—three times the value of the independent valuation—being a big chunk of money up-front, the member for Grey argues, to landowners who are willing if not enthusiastic to relinquish their properties. Landholders, he says, know they are being generously rewarded by the tripling of their wealth. For properties alongside mining projects, Mr Ramsey wants minimum setbacks of one kilometre from the mining activity with farmers paid a comparable minimum offer on affected paddocks. Obviously, the member for Grey believes all resource companies are cashed up and are able to dole out money willy-nilly to overcome their access issues. My experience, our experience, of dealing with the resources companies is that this is not the case, and many resource companies in this state are junior explorers and mid-tier producers who, like many farmers, struggle each year doing what they love. I appreciate that many landowners in this state have a deep connection with their land. Quite frankly, however, this policy cheapens that connection and reduces it to a simple formula bias towards a big pay day. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Alas, the minister's time has expired. Mr Whetstone House of Assembly Mr Whetstone: A big pay day? You've got to be kidding. You are a joke! Fracking in your backyard. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Chaffey is called to order. Leader.