Housing Supply

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): My question is to the Premier. How many homes have been built on land at Goolwa North and Fisherman Bay since May 2023? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: On 8 May 2023, the government announced that up to 2,500 new homes had been, and I quote, 'unlocked' after code amendments were initiated by the minister at Goolwa North and Fisherman Bay.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:13): The Leader of the Opposition is right; we have unlocked supply. This is a genuine departure of policy since we have been elected. Much of the emphasis of governments prior has been exclusively on infill. I don't share that view, and we made clear our philosophical position as a government on this prior to the election. We believe both infill and urban growth have a role to play. We don't think that urban growth should necessarily be characterised as a dirty word; we believe that urban growth, provided—

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner: It's two words.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Sure. Urban growth is appropriate provided that the necessary work is done around planning of infrastructure, services, open space—what we are doing in the creation of communities, rather than just gutter-to-gutter housing without much reference to consequence after the fact.

We are in favour of urban growth, and let me explain why. Infill unleashed is having consequences on our streets. It is having consequences on our communities because what we are seeing is cars completely congesting parking in streets, we are losing homes that are diminishing the heritage and sense of place in various suburbs around our state, and we think that that should be addressed in a considered way, which is why the government has reforms with respect to heritage.

We are in favour of infill but we are more in favour of strategic infill rather than letting-it-rip infill. Strategic infill is something else that this government is leaning on in a way that hasn't been universally supported by industry: through our acquisition of things like the West End site at Thebarton, what we are seeking to do in the member for Badcoe's electorate at LeCornu, the land swap that we are pursuing at Keswick, just to name a few examples.

But I also believe that, on top of strategic infill, working families should not be deprived of the opportunity to have a job and be able to live in a home with a backyard so that the kids can get out and enjoy playing a bit of backyard cricket or mucking around with soccer or netball, or whatever it might be, in a healthy way, rather than being deprived of that opportunity, which so many other families in the past in South Australia have been able to enjoy.

So we believe in both. We believe that families should be afforded the opportunity to have a choice: a strategic infill location at maybe a more modest expense close to the CBD and transport, or having a house with a yard in it and that the provision of that should be affordable and accessible. That's why, as a government, as soon as we got in, we have been putting the pedal to the metal and accelerating efforts to actually expand urban growth opportunities and actually release land: land that hasn't been released prior, land that when you add it up amounts to the single biggest land release in the history of the state. That's something we are proud of.

Do we want to see homes built on that land as quickly as possible? You better believe it. Do we want to see that happen? Of course, we do, which is exactly why we are doing the work around infrastructure, code amendments, land division, creating departments and actually getting some things moving. It's also why the HIA, the Commonwealth Bank, the BCA are all queuing up to applaud the work that this government is doing, and we are going to keep doing it until we start seeing that housing supply flow in a way that will benefit countless South Australians.