Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Buckland Park BUCKLAND PARK The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD Legislative Council BUCKLAND PARK The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:04): I have a supplementary question. Does the minister agree that people who choose to buy land in a development such as Buckland Park can make their own assessment about whether or not they need a bus service or whether or not they need a vehicle? If they did need a bus service they would not buy in such an area. The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development Minister for Urban Development and Planning Minister for Small Business BUCKLAND PARK The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:04): I thank the honourable member for his question. He raises the point that it is, after all, the consumers who should be able to choose, rather than have it dictated to them. The government, through its planning policies, is trying to make our city more efficient, and an enormous amount of work has gone into the 30 year plan to try to identify areas for land that will achieve a number of competing objectives. As I said, the fruits of that work will be released at some stage in the future, and the honourable member will just have to wait. An honourable member Legislative Council An honourable member: When are you going to release it? The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: I am not going to give the honourable member a date. Members interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: The challenge I will give to the Leader of the Opposition is: come up with your own policies. Opposition members access government reports and then they borrow them, like they did with their stormwater policy. They looked at Stormwater Adelaide and borrowed the whole lot. It was the greatest act of plagiarism you would ever see. When we get this report, the honourable member will see—and he will get the report soon enough—the significant amount of work that has gone into identifying land with these competing interests. I thank the honourable member for his question, but the honourable member will see that we need a range of options for people because people will have different needs. Whatever we might think about density living within transient oriented developments, and so on, and whatever we think about particular styles of living, in high-rises or elsewhere, there will always be some members of our community who will prefer to live in outer suburbs where they have their own land. The point I think the Hon. Mr Hood is making is that, ultimately, people should be able to make their own choice. We are attempting, through the 30-year plan, to encourage more dense development along corridors, and it is important that we do so. However, we need to accept that there will always be some people who will require a different type of development. Remember that the growth in our city is much more modest than we are seeing in cities such as Brisbane and Perth, where every year there are an extra 80,000 people living in those cities. We are talking about growth rates that are only a fraction of that level but, nevertheless, even with those growth rates, we could still have another 300,000 or 400,000 people in this city within the next 15 or 20 years and, if we do, it is important that we accommodate those people with a range of options. Again, I can only say that people should read the EIS and, if they feel strongly about it, they should respond.