<!--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="2011-04-06" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2465" />
  <endPage num="2532" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Liquor Licensing</name>
      <page num="2474" />
      <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000130">
        <heading>LIQUOR LICENSING</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4363" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. T.A. FRANKS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2011-04-06">
            <name>LIQUOR LICENSING</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2011-04-06T15:03:00" />
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000131">
          <timeStamp time="2011-04-06T15:03:00" />
          <by role="member" id="4363">The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:03): </by> By way of a supplementary question, I am heartened to hear the minister has talked to Renew Adelaide, and I would hope that in her conversations about licences—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1704">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000132">
          <by role="member" id="1704">The PRESIDENT:</by>  Without explanation.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4363">
        <name>The Hon. T.A. FRANKS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000133">
          <by role="member" id="4363">The Hon. T.A. FRANKS:</by>  —she would be looking at the laneway sector. Can the minister tell us if the arts and the laneway sector should have to actually meet the same requirements as the Festival Centre to run a very small scale operation?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1821" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. G.E. GAGO</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Public Sector Management, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises</electorate>
        <startTime time="2011-04-06T15:03:00" />
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000134">
          <timeStamp time="2011-04-06T15:03:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1821">The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Public Sector Management, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises) (15:03): </by> Currently, the requirements are not exactly the same for a small and a large venue. Although the broad framework is similar, the considerations are very different. The level of scrutiny and the level of conditions that might be placed on a venue that might be looking at crowds of hundreds of people, compared with an activity that might be involving 50 people—those applications are dealt with in a very different way. Although the framework is similar, the level of scrutiny and the conditions that are likely to be put in place are very different. It is much simpler and easier for those applications for smaller events, smaller venues, to be processed than for something large and complicated.</text>
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000135">If we look at things like the Schützenfest—that is a very good example. We have a large event that goes over a couple of days and involves large crowds. With the level of amenities required, the level of security, and so on, conditions around events like that are very stringent and are reviewed after every single event, whereas an event such as Renew Adelaide<term></term>opened up a gallery recently in North Terrace. If it was a small event involving a small number of people, it would require a much simpler process.</text>
        <text id="20110406becd45f6d516408c80000136">In terms of our laneways, Renew Adelaide discussed these, so I have discussed that also with Tim. Again, I can only reiterate the comment that I have already made, and that is, the diversification of the types of facilities, businesses, events and activities throughout our city centre is very important to the vibrancy and safety of our city centre.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>