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. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council BUCKLAND PARK The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:08): I have a supplementary question. Given that the government has now given the green light to the Buckland Park subdivision— Members interjecting: The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: —or is effectively intending to support the subdivision, in the event the subdivision is approved will the government now remove Bowering Hill/Port Willunga from deferred urban in the southern region? The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development Minister for Urban Development and Planning Minister for Small Business The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:08): That really is rather a spurious supplementary question but, nonetheless, I will take it because, again, it brings up a whole lot of new issues. I do need to make the point that all the government has released is the EIS on Buckland Park, and there is a meeting about that tonight. It is appropriate that I, as the Minister for Urban Development and Planning, should ensure that that debate continues. My comments earlier today were aimed at ensuring that we have a balanced debate on this issue, not a debate based on emotive language. It is not true to suggest that that proposal has been given the green light by the government; rather, the EIS has been released, and it has to go out for public comment. It will also receive comment from all the relevant government agencies to ensure that that EIS is satisfactory in terms of addressing those key issues identified by the Development Assessment Commission. The company will respond, and the matter will come back to government, and it will then be assessed and go to the Governor. So, there is a long way to go. I just want to see that this is properly considered, because it is difficult to find areas of land around Adelaide where we can expand, and I think that is the point being made by the honourable member. He is suggesting that areas in the south should not be used for urban development. Wherever we go to propose new expansion of our city, people will find reasons why we should not develop in that area. That is really the dilemma we face, and that is why it is important to consider those areas. In relation to Bowering Hill, I recently wrote to the Onkaparinga council, which sought my views on the future of that land, particularly given some comments that the Minister for Infrastructure had made. I have informed the council that that land will be looked at in the context of the importance of the wine industry to the Southern Vales region, and I said that any development that takes place on that land would be compatible with the interests of that industry. I am happy to supply the honourable member with a copy of that letter, which clarifies that position.