Adelaide Aquatic Centre

Mr BATTY (Bragg) (14:39): My question is again to the Minister for Planning. Has the minister referred the new Adelaide Aquatic Centre development to the federal environment minister for approval under the commonwealth's Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act and, if not, why not?

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for Energy and Mining) (14:39): Like I said earlier, the member for Bragg has started shaving; I would be worried if I were other members in the area. I hear he's got that glint in his eye.

The state government does assess whether referrals are required. We will follow all the procedures that are necessary. At any stage, at any time, the EPBC can intervene and refer any project it wishes to. Of course, they will do their own work, as do we. We are also returning Parklands back to the people of South Australia through our development of the Adelaide Aquatic Centre. What I am disappointed in is how members opposite are now actively opposing the brand-new Adelaide Aquatic Centre. The member for Bragg is out there opposing the development of the Adelaide Aquatic Centre.

Despite having proposed to put a basketball stadium on the Parklands, they are now, all of a sudden, the great saviours of the Parklands. The basketball stadium, don't talk about it. They imagined a basketball stadium.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Point of order, minister.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: What basketball stadium? They don't even know what basketball is.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, point of order.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: He should be named for that. Point of order, sir.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It's your colleagues who are holding us up.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Chaffey! Member for Chaffey, you are on your third warning, as is the member for Hammond and also the member for Flinders.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Sir, standing order 98: the minister is debating.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think the minister was being irresponsible in responding to interjections.

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner: Which is also out of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Which is also out of order, but I have identified individual interjections, so would you like me to chuck out the people who interjected?

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner: If you are chucking the minister out, sir, then yes.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I am looking at the people who caused the interjections first.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Point of order, sir.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You are treading on thin ice here.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Sir, you asked a question and I am offering an earnest—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, it was a rhetorical question.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Morphett, are you making any commentary on my ruling?

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: My ruling was that he was responding to interjections, not debate.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: They were laughing at me, were they? That's okay. You can laugh at me from the outside. You can leave now for 15 minutes.

Mr Cowdrey: What standing order, sir?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Interjecting and causing disruption. Member for Chaffey, you can leave for 15 minutes under 137A.

The honourable member for Chaffeyhaving withdrawn from the chamber:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: It was all net in that exchange, sir, all net—nothing but net in that exchange, sir. We will do our own assessments on the EPBC referrals if they are necessary. If the department feels that they are necessary, it will be done. Ultimately, the EPBC and Minister Plibersek, at their own volition, at any stage—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Flinders, you will leave for 10 minutes as well. You have been warned three times.

The honourable member for Flinders having withdrawn from the chamber:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The minister will now speak uninterrupted.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Thank you, sir. We do our own self-assessment, and if we think there are referrals we have intergovernmental agreements in place with the commonwealth government. If the state government feels there needs to be a referral, we proactively refer. If we think there doesn't need to be a referral, we won't refer to the EPBC. But, ultimately, the commonwealth government at any stage, including Minister Plibersek at any stage, can put any development they see fit to put into the EPBC process and do an assessment.

Mr Cowdrey interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I think the member for Colton's frustration is boiling over. It's not my fault his leader is silent and invisible. It's not my fault that the opposition are in the position that they are in. It is not my fault.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Point of order, sir: ad hominem attacks are inconsistent with standing order 98.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: From my reading of his answer, the minister was actually trying to provide a comprehensive answer to the question asked. If it weren't for the constant interruptions, his answer would be over now and you would be on your next question.

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner: He hasn't answered.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, he has answered the question, in my view.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: As I said in the first minute of my answer, we have not referred it, but members opposite were not listening because they were interjecting. What I did say was that at any stage we have intergovernmental relationships with the commonwealth government, as did the previous government, is where government departments self-assess. If they think there is a need to refer to the EPBC, we refer it. Why do we do that? We pre-emptively refer if we think it would be triggered regardless.

There is no way of us stopping an EPBC referral or a pull in from the department because they do their own assessments. These questions are moot. If the federal agency or the federal minister think that it is warranted for a referral, then they will call it in regardless of what the state government's view is. I suppose it could be lack of experience, lack of understanding of the process that could lead to these questions, but ultimately the truth is this: we have done our assessment and we don't think it requires an EPBC referral. We are returning more parklands back to the people of South Australia.

Members opposite are opposing now the development of an aquatic centre, despite taking not only a brand-new basketball stadium built on Parklands to the election, they were also taking an aquatic centre development to the election.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think the minister has finished his answer.