House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Hackney Road Footbridge Hackney Road Footbridge Mr MARSHALL House of Assembly Dunstan Leader of the Opposition Hackney Road Footbridge Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:30): My question is to the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure. Why does the minister think that it is the responsibility of the Adelaide City Council and the Norwood, Payneham and St Peters council to fund the proposed Hackney Road footbridge when the footbridge is only required because of the changes made to Hackney Road to accommodate the O-Bahn tunnel project? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Asking a minister what he thinks gives the minister a lot of scope. The minister. The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN House of Assembly Lee Minister for Transport and Infrastructure Minister for Housing and Urban Development The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:31): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and can I thank the leader for his question. It is important to remember the genesis of this proposal. The footbridge proposal was not ever part of the O-Bahn project. The O-Bahn project provides sufficient pedestrian crossings across Hackney Road. Of course, it is worth remembering that the actual carriageway of Hackney Road isn't widened through the O-Bahn project—merely there is a reallocation of road space—so pedestrians will be crossing over the same distance that they previously were before the project. The genesis of the project was from one of the governing council members of St Peter's College. He and the principal of that school came to see me many months ago and suggested that this was something that they had been thinking about as a school for some months and that they were— Ms Sanderson House of Assembly Ms Sanderson: Like the letter from Adelaide High about a footbridge that you didn't get. The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN House of Assembly The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: In fact, the member for Adelaide interjects. It's refreshing that a member of a governing council for a school on the boundary of the City of Adelaide should actually be proactive, talking about a footbridge, unlike her performance on the governing council of Adelaide High School. It's an interesting contrast. Ms Sanderson House of Assembly Ms Sanderson: You should read your mail. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Adelaide is warned. Point of order, member for Morialta? Mr GARDNER House of Assembly Mr GARDNER: The minister is now debating issues irrelevant to the question asked. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: No, what he is doing is responding to interjections, which is of course technically out of order, and he is talking about another famous footbridge. The minister. The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN House of Assembly The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: As I was saying, it's interesting to contrast the performance of that level of diligence by a member of the governing council of a school on the border of the City of Adelaide with the member for Adelaide's performance, but I digress. After that proposal came to the government, we were offered from St Peter's College the opportunity, if a footbridge was to be delivered, to land that footbridge on some of their land, and that would be a contribution from St Peter's College. Of course, these footbridges in today's contemporary standards are not inexpensive pieces of infrastructure; they have to be compliant with disability standards and they are necessarily expensive. You either have to have very long ramps or you have to have elevator facilities at each end to enable people to be able to use them. Given that we didn't have capacity within the O-Bahn project, because it was never part of the O-Bahn project, I thought that a council like Norwood, Payneham and St Peters might think that this might be of some use to their residents. I also thought that the Adelaide City Council would also think that it might be of some use to the people who enjoy using the facilities in their council area, so I approached them and said, 'Would you be interested in making a contribution?' Norwood, Payneham and St Peters made it very clear some weeks ago in the media that they didn't think it would be worthy of their contribution, and I have to say that pretty much regardless of what the recommendation was from Adelaide City Council staff, or even what the predilections of the elected members would have been at last night's Adelaide City Council meeting, that decision from Norwood, Payneham and St Peters pretty much forced the Adelaide City Council's hand. As this was never a project which had been proposed or pushed by the state government, given that this was just yet another opportunity and another occasion where the government had listened very carefully to all of those people in Hackney who were interested in the O-Bahn project, and given we tried to assist them in this endeavour, now that the council is uninterested in a footbridge, neither is the government. We will continue to provide the same level of pedestrian access across the same width of carriageway across Hackney Road that we have been for many years, and continue— Ms Chapman interjecting: The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN House of Assembly The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Well, if you think it's rubbish you know the appropriate remedy: move a motion. Ms Chapman interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The deputy leader is called to order, and for earlier offences the members for Hartley and Chaffey. Is the minister finished? He is. The member for Wright.