Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Matters of Interest MATTERS OF INTEREST Gawler Racecourse GAWLER RACECOURSE The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (15:21): Just over a week ago, His Honour Mr Justice Duggan dismissed the application by the Town of Gawler for judicial review of my decision as minister for urban development and planning to rezone part of the Gawler Racecourse site. The legal action taken by Gawler council, in particular its Chief Planning Officer, Mr Michael Wohlstadt, has cost the ratepayers of Gawler and the Barossa and Gawler Jockey Club dearly, and has only served to delay an outcome that is favoured by the vast majority of local residents. The motivation for this action by the Chief Planner of Gawler council is something I will discuss in more detail shortly, but first I wish to address allegations made on 9 February in this council by the Leader of the Opposition that relate to this issue. In answer to a question from the Hon. Russell Wortley on 15 October 2009 about the proposed upgrade of the Gawler Racecourse, I provided a very detailed answer about the upgrade proposal and then outlined briefly the proposal for rezoning the surplus land at the southern end of the racecourse. I also point out that there were a number of interjections that are not recorded in Hansard, but clearly at the end of the answer I refer to comments by Mr Dawkins, so there were clearly a number of interjections. Mr Parnell then asked the following question: By way of supplementary question, has the minister been lobbied in relation to the future of the Gawler Racecourse by former senator Nick Bolkus? I replied, 'No, the Hon. Mr Bolkus has not lobbied me in relation to that matter.' Everyone in this council is aware that standing orders require a supplementary question to be relevant to the answer given to the original question. I have had no discussions with Thoroughbred Racing SA, Nick Bolkus or anyone else in relation to the funding of the Gawler Racecourse development and the discussions that led up to the government decision to support the racecourse development, until I was first requested to rezone the surplus racecourse land some time in July 2008. I subsequently met with Thoroughbred Racing SA in October 2008. It is clearly on the record that the Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing announced the government's decision to provide financial support—I think it was some $6 million, if I recall—to the Gawler Racecourse redevelopment on 28 May 2008. I was not involved in that decision—nor would I expect to be as minister for urban development and planning—or any details of the racecourse redevelopment. My role as minister for urban development and planning was to initiate a ministerial development plan amendment which sought to rezone surplus land south of the racecourse. Mr Parnell's supplementary question did not refer to rezoning or surplus land at the racecourse and referred to the future of the racecourse, and I stand by my answer that I was not lobbied by Mr Bolkus in relation to that matter, that matter clearly being the funding and redevelopment of the racecourse, which I referred to in my initial answer. The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Indeed, the interjection, which is not recorded in Hansard, clearly referred to it. Now, we have had people like Mr Lucas— The Hon. R.I. Lucas interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: —and there he goes again, Mr President. We have Mr Lucas, who is a past master at interjecting, interrupting your answer and then going and distorting it to the media. He has done it on repeated occasions and, indeed, he is doing it right now, but Hansard probably will not show that Mr Lucas was again shouting out and disrupting as he did on that occasion. But it is quite clear that my answer was about the redevelopment of the Gawler Racecourse, and I have never discussed that with Mr Bolkus. Indeed, if it came to the actual meeting that Mr Bolkus requested, in fact, the later attendance in my diary does not refer to Mr Bolkus actually being at that meeting, but that is another issue. The fact that someone might have contacted my office to arrange a meeting that was well after the date the Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing announced it clearly settles that matter. There are a number of other claims which I do not have time to address today, but there are two points I wish to make. First, the case by Gawler council was supplied by Mr Parnell misusing his capacity as a member to get freedom of information details. Members interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: It was supplied to Gawler council. Admit it. He supplied it. Mr Parnell has been trotting around trying to get councils everywhere to seek judicial review of planning decisions. He has been up at Mount Barker telling people they should do it, and he has told people at Gawler East. He is in league with this planner. The second matter is that what I have subsequently discovered is that Gawler council has received funding (some $15,000, I believe) from the Ahrens group in relation to this court case. I understand Mr Wohlstadt also has approached other major property owners and developers in Gawler to support their legal challenge. I will take that up further in a later debate. Time expired.