Legislative Council Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1) 54 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Question Time Adelaide Oval Precinct Adelaide Oval Precinct The Hon. K.J. MAHER Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition Adelaide Oval Precinct The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (14:30): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Treasurer a question in relation to a private hotel at Adelaide Oval. Leave granted. The Hon. K.J. MAHER Legislative Council The Hon. K.J. MAHER: In his budget speech, the Treasurer said: This government's reform agenda, reflected in this budget, will help create jobs by lowering the costs of doing business for all businesses in the state, rather than relying on politicians and public servants trying to pick winners and giving handouts to a small number of lucky businesses. My questions to the Treasurer are: 1.	Does the Treasurer completely support the Marshall Liberal government's decision to support the building of a private hotel at Adelaide Oval with a $42 million state-backed loan? 2.	How does that action stand up with his previous comments that his government would not pick winners? 3.	Is there any requirement for a minimum number of jobs for this project, and are there clawback provisions if that number of jobs is not met? The Hon. R.I. LUCAS Legislative Council Treasurer The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:31): I completely support every decision the government takes and am happy to do so. That would include this particular decision as well. The essential difference with this particular project is that the asset actually is a government asset; it's on the state's balance sheet. As the Leader of the Opposition would know as a former minister, the assets at Adelaide Oval are on the state's balance sheet. The hotel will be on the state's balance sheet. It's actually quite different to other loan and/or grant arrangements to that extent. This is the government, the state, adding to the quality of its balance sheet and the quality of its asset. The Premier has been reported as saying that—and I think I have seen him make comment along the following lines—to the extent that the state can invest in its own asset, clearly in association with the partners that comprise the Stadium Management Authority, it ensures an ongoing improvement of the asset base at Adelaide Oval. Hopefully, it ensures protection of the revenue base from the oval because there are existing lease arrangements in relation to Adelaide Oval of which the member would be very familiar. There are requirements for the Stadium Management Authority to pay money into sinking funds to maintain and upgrade the asset base. There are requirements for the Stadium Management Authority to make payments into something—I can't remember the exact name—a community development-type fund, which supports community-based sporting projects, programs and infrastructure. So it has to generate sufficient funds on an ongoing basis, not just in the short term but in the long term, to sustain the revenues to do that. It is their view that this is one way to do that, together with the various other projects that they have been involved with: roof climbs, the restaurant, golf. There are various revenue streams that the Stadium Management Authority has looked at. Perhaps when the former government approved whatever it was—$535 million—to go into the project, it might not have envisaged golf, roof climbs and five or four-star restaurants or, indeed, even a hotel as being part of the project. Intriguingly, I had a meeting this morning with someone associated with the Sydney Cricket Ground trust—not on that particular issue—and this particular person indicated that they had in the past looked at the issue of a hotel for the Sydney Cricket Ground. They were much more landbound, if I could use that particular phrase—that is, there just wasn't the capacity for them to do it—but they could certainly see the argument why people who do look at stadia around Australia would follow the trend of some other parts of the world. In relation to the other aspects of the question, I will certainly take them on notice. I am not aware that the arrangements—the minister who's had primary carriage of this has been minister Stephan Knoll, Mr President, but my recollection was there are no clawback job-related aspects to the loan arrangements. If my recollection is not correct, I will come back and clarify that with a further response. If there are any other aspects of the member's myriad questions that I have not addressed, I will take them on notice and bring back a reply.