BAROSSA VALLEY REGION

The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (15:05): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Leader of the Government questions in relation to a possible name change for the Barossa region.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS: In 2006, the Rann government announced that it would be reducing the state to 12 uniform state government regions for use across government departments and agencies. This was fully completed in 2009. The Barossa region encompasses the local government areas of Gawler, Barossa, Light and Mallala. My questions are:

1. Has cabinet decided to change the name of the Barossa region to Barossa, Light and Lower North and, if so, when will the name change come into effect?

2. What organisations or government departments will the name change impact upon and were those organisations consulted prior to cabinet's deliberations?

3. Before cabinet made the decision, what consultation did the government undertake with local councils, local members of parliament, the Barossa Regional Development Australia Board and others and, if no consultation was undertaken, on what basis was the decision made?

4. Who will pay for the new letterheads, stationery and websites brought about by the branding change, and has the government been advised of the proposed cost of this action?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:06): When the government put out the new regions—and perhaps the most visible example of that was when the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide came out—there was, of course, some confusion. When talking about very large growth in the Barossa region (getting on towards 100,000) it can be very confusing to people who think that may well be within what we commonly call the Barossa Valley. There were a number of comments made to the government at the time that it was rather confusing when the government had a policy—and still keeps that policy—and makes no apology for trying to restrain growth within the Barossa Valley; that is urban growth within the Barossa Valley.

However, the honourable member referred to the Light and Mallala councils and so on that are affected and, of course, there will be significant growth into the future so, after some debate within government, cabinet decided that it would rename the region Barossa, Light and Lower North to geographically better reflect the area described in this region. If one uses just the name 'Barossa' then it tends to suggest the Barossa Valley but, of course, the Light and Lower North region is where much of the future growth will take place. The government made the decision because it believed that the name is simply a better, more accurate reflection of the area. If we are talking about the Barossa, Light and Lower North region, particularly in terms of future growth, it much more accurately reflects where that will be.

There has been some discussion of that and, as I said, the government itself received significant criticism at the time it released the 30-year plan because it was suggested by a number of people, including councils, that the Barossa name was not reflective or it would give a misleading impression. That is why the government has changed the administration region—to better reflect reality. In relation to costs, I believe they would be absolutely minimal. We are talking about an administrative region. In relation to stationery and the like, there would be very few bodies for whom that would have relevance. Rather, the new name, as I said, more accurately reflects the region. I would have thought most people would, indeed, welcome that.