<!--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="2011-09-28" />
  <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="3925" />
  <endPage num="4010" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000027">
      <heading>Question Time</heading>
    </text>
    <subject>
      <name>City-Wide Land Audits</name>
      <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000028">
        <heading>CITY-WIDE LAND AUDITS</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1820" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Leader of the Opposition</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2011-09-28">
            <name>CITY-WIDE LAND AUDITS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2011-09-28T14:23:00" />
        <page num="3926" />
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000029">
          <timeStamp time="2011-09-28T14:23:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1820">The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:23):</by> I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister representing the Minister for Urban Development, Planning and the City of Adelaide a question about city-wide audits.</text>
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000030">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1820" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000031">
          <by role="member" id="1820">The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:</by>  In May this year it was reported that infrastructure to support Mount Barker's radical expansion will be vastly more expensive than other districts. The Department of Planning and Local Government revealed that Mount Barker's hilly terrain means that the infrastructure cost per block will reach between $60,000 and $70,000 compared with between $30,000 to $40,000 in the flatter areas of our state. We already know that the land release will be one of the most expensive in the state's history. We also know that the state government has decided not to release submissions to Adelaide's 30-year plan.</text>
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000032">In that same article in May this year, the department indicated that Mount Barker was selected for the population explosion after a city-wide audit. The article went on to state that the audit considered Murray Bridge and areas along the Southern Expressway for major growth. In fact, on the morning of that article being published, I informally asked the minister for a copy of that audit. He indicated that he would also like to see a copy and that he would get me a copy. I thought that, in fairness, I should apply formally, so I then wrote to the minister, and I have subsequently followed up with a number of emails. We are now in September, and we have not yet seen a copy of that audit. My questions are:</text>
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000033">1.&amp;#x9;Where is the audit, and why is the minister keeping it secret?</text>
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000034">2.&amp;#x9;Why will the government not share with the people of South Australia the details of that city-wide audit?</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, Minister for Gambling</electorate>
        <startTime time="2011-09-28T14:24:00" />
        <text id="20110928dd2c141b7b5b421e80000035">
          <timeStamp time="2011-09-28T14:24:00" />
          <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, Minister for Gambling) (14:24):</by>  I thank the honourable member for his most important questions. I will refer them to the minister for planning and development in another place and bring back a response.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>