<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2009-09-10" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>3</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="3131" />
  <endPage num="3185" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Stansbury Marina</name>
      <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000307">
        <heading>STANSBURY MARINA</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3489" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-09-10">
            <name>STANSBURY MARINA</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-09-10T14:57:00" />
        <page num="3155" />
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000308">
          <timeStamp time="2009-09-10T14:57:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3489">The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (14:57):</by>  I seek leave to make a personal explanation before asking the Leader of the Government a question.</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000309">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="55">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000310">
          <by role="member" id="1704">The PRESIDENT:</by>  Do you mean a brief explanation?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3489">
        <name>The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000311">
          <by role="member" id="3489">The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE:</by>  A brief explanation.</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000312">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="55">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000313">
          <by role="member" id="1704">The PRESIDENT:  </by>Order!</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000314">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3489">
        <name>The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000315">
          <by role="member" id="3489">The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE:</by>  Thank you, Mr President, and thank you for your protection. My question is to the Minister for Urban Planning and Development regarding the Stansbury marina. Family First are not generally opposed to development. However, clearly the Stansbury marina proposal is a fundamentally flawed development that will work against the best interests of that local community and the environment, and it will not provide adequate infrastructure for the increase in population, either. The developer has had a very long period of time—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704" kind="interjection">
        <name>An honourable member</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000316">
          <by role="member" id="1704">An honourable member:</by>  Is this a speech or what?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3489">
        <name>The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000317">
          <by role="member" id="3489">The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE:</by>  This is the explanation. The developer has had a very long time to get his EIS and other applications in order. Clearly, they are still not in order. Why is the minister giving them another three weeks, and why does he not apply the 'early no' rule today?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business</electorate>
        <startTime time="2009-09-10T14:58:00" />
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000318">
          <timeStamp time="2009-09-10T14:58:00" />
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (14:58):</by>  Essentially because crown law advice is that one needs to provide natural justice, otherwise the decision might be challenged. It is the Governor who makes the decision, acting of course on the advice of the cabinet. The action that I have taken—and I set this out in the statement I made on Tuesday in relation to this matter—</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000319">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="55">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000320">
          <by role="member" id="1704">The PRESIDENT:  </by>Order!</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000321">
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY:</by>  —is that firstly—</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000322">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="55">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000323">
          <by role="member" id="1704">The PRESIDENT:  </by>Order! Government backbenchers will come to order, too.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000324">
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY:</by>  Earlier this year, I wrote to the proponent because the EIS had not been produced, even though I think the guidelines had been set by DAC some time back. I think it was the end of 2007; certainly it was a fair while ago. It was back in 2007 that either the project was declared or the guidelines were set. I wrote to the proponent giving them three months, which I thought was reasonable, to then produce an EIS indicating that if they did not produce the EIS I would then consider an 'early no'.</text>
        <text id="20090910ac5f415f238e480a90000325">However, just before the deadline the proponent did put up an EIS and so had complied with that request. I think I was duty bound to consider that request, and I did so. As I indicated the other day, for a number of reasons the quality of that EIS was not sufficient, and therefore I decided that I would not put it out for public consultation, because it just did not address adequately the issues which had been set by the Development Assessment Commission and, as also indicated the other day, it had significantly changed in scope from the original envisaged project. So, really, the answer is that the advice I have is that, before one gives an early no, one is obliged to give the proponent natural justice, and I am doing that. The proponent now has a couple of weeks left to come up with reasons, and I need to consider those, but, certainly from what I have seen to date, there would have to be some very special reasons indeed why I would not take the course of action of giving the project an early no.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>