Royal Adelaide Hospital Site Redevelopment

Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:20): My question is to the Treasurer. Does the Treasurer support the proposal to establish the history of South Australia museum proposed by the government's preferred proponent as part of the old Royal Adelaide Hospital site redevelopment?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Would the minister be seated. The minister has not said anything yet, so he is not being provocative. The wall of interjections he is getting are all, of course, out of order. I just want to draw to the attention of the member for Morialta that he had a call to order and a warning from the morning session of the house, so he is now on two warnings. The member for Schubert already had a warning, and the member for Hartley already had a call to order, so he is warned. I am sorry—the member for Schubert had a call to order.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: This morning.

Mr GARDNER: Point of order, sir: the only time I spoke this morning was prior to the first division, and the Hansard records who was there and capable of giving warnings to me at that time. I certainly don't remember one.

The SPEAKER: I will consult the Deputy Speaker, who was here during the morning session. The minister.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:22): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In response to that question, it is important to remind ourselves what has been proposed for the use of the old Royal Adelaide Hospital site. We not only have the preferred developer, of course, who will be superintending the development but we have a partnership between the University of Adelaide and the developer to deliver a research and innovation hub.

We have the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings, and yes, absolutely, the proponent has been talking to organisations around Adelaide, indeed I think around Australia, trying to attract their interest to assist them in what will be a project requirement from the government, that is, the re-use of those five important heritage buildings which front that corner of Frome Road and North Terrace.

Whether it is to be the use that the leader refers to in his question, or indeed that the proponent had referred to in their prospectus document—which, shock horror, amongst the dozens of other organisations that they have been talking to in the last six months, has finally, weeks after the government made these plans public, somehow made its way into the hands of the opposition—it will be up to the proponent to demonstrate that it can be used for that purpose. It is in the best interests of that heritage building, and it is in the best interests of the development as a whole. Given that, as we have set out in some detail both in this place and in the media, we need to go through a process—

Ms Redmond interjecting:

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Yes, we register your dissent to the leader. That is understood, member for Heysen. We know you are not happy. Those old and deep wounds take a long time to heal; I appreciate that, member for Heysen. Once that is resolved by the proponent in negotiations with the government, then if there are further developments about what is planned for that site, then once they are confirmed we will release those as well. But the fact is they are not confirmed and they are not yet ready to be released because it has not been agreed by the proponent, or by the government, that they will be going forward.

The SPEAKER: I have consulted the Deputy Speaker, and she said she made no calls to order or warnings in the morning session. Accordingly, the member for Unley was right; they must be from another day.