HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-02-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

NORTH TERRACE UPGRADE

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:46): I move:

That this house calls on the state government and the Adelaide City Council to create a South Australian/Australian landscape using indigenous native plants during the next phase of the North Terrace upgrade.

I have been on about this issue for quite a while, and I was very disappointed when the first stages of this project did not follow the recommendations of the landscape consultants, Taylor Lathlean Cullity, or the recommendations of Professor Tim Flannery and the director of the botanic gardens. I do not want to spend too much time on it because it is water under the bridge, but, as a result of a so-called survey, which was slanted a particular way, the Premier (Hon. Mike Rann), the relevant minister at the time (Hon. Jay Weatherill) and the Lord Mayor were misinformed and misguided in relation to the decision they made not to proceed with native trees on the northern side of North Terrace as recommended by Professor Flannery, the head of the botanic gardens and the landscape consultants employed for the job, Taylor, Lathlean and Cullity.

That was very disappointing, and I do not want to spend a lot of time on it, but the survey asked, 'Do you want plane trees or do you want spotted gums?' They are not eucalypts, for a start: they are a corymbia maculata. They are a beautiful tree, and many are in the botanic gardens. As far as I know they have not killed anyone, and to call them 'spotted' in a survey and ask people, 'Do you want spotted trees or do you want plane trees?' means that you will get a distorted answer, and that is exactly what happened. However, if you add up the respondents, you actually find that more people did not want plane trees than those who wanted them.

Anyway, I think there is a chance now in the remaining sections of North Terrace for the Premier, the minister for the environment and the Lord Mayor to atone for their sins of the past and the fact that, in their defence, they were misled and probably were not given the full story—or able to hear from Professor Tim Flannery, Stephen Forbes and Taylor, Lathlean and Cullity. What the government and the city council should do is try to create on the remaining section of North Terrace as it upgrades something that looks South Australian, something that looks Australian. I do not know what the hang-up is about being obsessed with looking European.

Governments and councils over time have got rid of the indigenous people from the city and anything indigenous when it comes to flora and fauna. It is time that we took pride in our indigenous South Australian flora, or other appropriate natives if we cannot do that. I am not anti-exotic trees because I have many myself. What I am trying to get in the city is a bit of balance. If one compares the CBD with Perth, Adelaide is not an Australian-looking city. It has no Australian or South Australian look about it. I defy anyone to show me something in Adelaide that is uniquely Australian or South Australian, other than the blue sky—which, thankfully, we can enjoy and which people in the Northern Hemisphere do not see in the way in which we do.

Why we would want to carry on with the colonial cringe and recreate England or Europe on North Terrace escapes me. My father was English and I love a lot of things about England. There has been a fantastic contribution by British people around the world and, overall, it has been excellent, but we do not have to keep pretending that we are living in England or Europe. We are not: we are in a different environment. Why the hell would tourists want to look at several variants of plane trees? Tim Flannery's vision for North Terrace—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: Because they are shady.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: Well, there are native indigenous trees that can do the job; and there are other reasons which I will explain shortly. The vision of Tim Flannery was that tourists would come along and see a bit of Australiana in flora and see parrots and other native birds on North Terrace. Plane trees are shady trees. All trees have their place somewhere, but plane trees, like other exotic trees, are basically sterile—

Ms Fox interjecting:

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: In terms of habitat and ecology. I will give you a basic lesson in ecology one day. They are sterile in the sense that, with some exceptions, they do not support native bird or animal life. Parrots will eat fruit on fruit trees, but I defy anyone to show me what a plane tree does to sustain our native population of birds. In the Adelaide area alone 20 native mammals are locally extinct, 21 native birds are extinct and 85 native plants are extinct. That is an appalling record. Extinct means dead, gone. That is what has happened. It is not simply about the look, important as that maybe for tourists and others who want to look at an Australian landscape. Other reasons, including habitat, are more important. If you do not have habitat you do not have native animals and birds. Native birds do not survive as a result of plane trees or other exotic trees.

There are other reasons, and I distinguish between an indigenous tree, shrub or grass and something called a native. Obviously, they are native to come under that generic label, but native trees, shrubs and grasses from the rest of Australia can be inappropriate to plant in Adelaide. Something might be native to North Queensland but it maybe quite inappropriate on North Terrace. People have to be careful and distinguish between indigenous plants—which have evolved over millions of years in this environment—and plants elsewhere in Australia which might be inappropriate to plant in the Adelaide environment.

Other reasons are very important. Indigenous trees have evolved to cope with drought; and we are seeing the consequences of that now. I saw a report in The Advertiser today from Jon Lamb that most silver birch trees around Adelaide are dead and elm trees are dying because they have not evolved for this sort of climate. Indigenous trees have evolved to withstand drought, so we should be planting them for that reason, as well. Council trucks are watering exotic trees, trying to keep them alive, whereas, if indigenous or appropriate native trees were planted, they would not have to do that.

There are other important reasons. We are keen on the sequestration of carbon. Indigenous trees, almost without exception, are sequestering carbon throughout the year, but deciduous trees are obviously not going to sequester carbon when they have lost their leaves.

There is another reason too, and that is that the leaf litter of deciduous trees—the exotics that are brought in; there are some native deciduous trees, but I am referring to the exotics—is generally incompatible with our creeks and riverine systems. In fact, an academic at Adelaide University put it very well when he said that it is a bit like living off fast food all the time. It is not good for the Torrens. It is no wonder the Torrens is the way it is when it has to cope with leaf litter from trees that are from a different environment. The council says, 'Well, we try to sweep them up', but they do not sweep them all up and neither do the other councils in the metropolitan area.

It is not simply to make us look like South Australia or part of Australia; it is for reasons of habitat, and similar reasons should apply to people in their own home gardens and street trees and park trees. There are places where, obviously, you have exotic trees—anyone who wants to take a purist approach, I think, could be classified as fanatical—but what we have at the moment in the CBD (on our terraces and in our squares) is an imbalance. We have a preponderance of European trees, and now we are increasingly seeing Manchurian plum and pear trees, American pear trees, and so on, being introduced.

What South Australian trees could we plant? There is a whole list. I urge the government and the city council to consult with authorities such as State Flora, which kindly prepared a list for me—I cannot go through it all here because it would take too long—of suitable indigenous and native trees, shrubs and grasses that could be planted along North Terrace. I have the list here. For the next stages of North Terrace the state government and the city council could have a look at what State Flora recommends. Likewise, Stephen Forbes, the Director of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens, has prepared for me a very extensive list of suitable trees for North Terrace. These are smart people, qualified botanists and ecologists.

Some councils (the City of West Torrens and the City of Mitcham) are pioneering in their streets some Australian trees that the public is not aware of. Not all of these trees would be suitable for North Terrace. I am not suggesting that, but I am just saying that there is a range of trees, many of which we have not even tried. They include: the wilga (Australian willow); crow's ash (Australian teak); blueberry ash; blackbean; the ivory curl tree; the fire wheel tree; and the white cedar, which exists also in Asia. There is a new variety of white cedar, because white cedar got a bad name because some people tripped on its seeds. A low fruiting variety has now been developed, which does not have the same problem of people slipping on its seeds, but it is still a white cedar. Others include: the dwarf apple (there are a lot of lovely angophoras); the smooth-barked apple (angophora costata, which members might have seen at around Christmas time in beautiful blossom); the red flowered mallee; and the list goes on and on.

At least for the next major stage of the North Terrace upgrade I am urging the government to try to get a bit of South Australia and Australia on display. Let's stop pretending that we are living in England or Europe, let's take account of the climate and issues such as habitat, and let's try to get some native birds on North Terrace which tourists would be thrilled to see. People from other countries love to see parrots, but parrots will not come and sit in plane trees.

One of the disadvantages of the plane tree, which is a lovely tree in its own right, is that it causes allergies. People who suffer from hay fever might wonder where the hay fever irritants come from. Well, you do not have to look too far along North Terrace to find that they are coming from the plane tree. They are noted for it; it is one of their characteristics. In fact, at certain stages of the year you need to wear gloves when you handle them. In many ways, they are probably not the ideal tree for North Terrace.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: It's water under the bridge. It is unfortunate what the Premier, the minister of the day, Jay Weatherill, and the Lord Mayor were conned into doing by a dodgy survey that was defended by a few people with a hidden agenda (often not so hidden), who tried to make out that that is what the people of South Australia wanted. The people of South Australia were not properly consulted, and if you ask them whether they want Adelaide to look like South Australia and Australia or like something transplanted from Europe I think I know the answer that you will get.

So, my earnest plea to the government is: for the next stage please listen to people like the director of the Botanic Gardens, Stephen Forbes, Professor Tim Flannery, and the highly qualified landscape consultants who were used originally but whose advice was ignored, Taylor Cullity Lethlean. These are highly regarded people who know what they are talking about. Let us have North Terrace looking a bit like South Australia for a change.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for Early Childhood Development, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management) (12:00): I rise on this motion from the honourable member to address the concerns that he raises about the use of exotic trees in relation to the North Terrace development. While I sympathise with some of the points that have been made by the honourable member, for reasons which I will explain we will be opposing this resolution, partly for practical reasons.

We have a development which is part finished and it would disturb the whole nature of the development to have one half of it being native trees and one half being exotic trees. So, there is that stylistic issue. But more generally, to go to some of the background of this, if members recall, this was a project that was initially proposed by the previous Liberal government. It was at a stage when we were newly elected to government and at the time I was minister for planning with responsibility for this project.

As a new government, we were presented with a critical report from the Public Works Committee which suggested that the project should not go ahead. We resisted that recommendation, but did undertake to reconsider some of the issues associated with the project. One of the issues was the use of, I think, spotted gum trees at that time, versus the use of exotics. We did give this some careful thought. I think there is a respectable argument to suggest that we should look at ways in which we can increase the nature and extent of our native plant population in the urban environment, and we support that proposition, but there is a question of also considering where that should happen.

While we continue to support the way in which the Parklands have been used to move towards native vegetation to showcase a number of important native plants and trees, I think that there is an argument to suggest that some of our colonial buildings and the setting in which they exist on North Terrace can work more harmoniously with exotic trees and plants.

We did explore this at the time. I remember the debate. There were some people who suggested that we should be moving towards native trees and that that should be a blanket proposition, but I think there is a respectable argument to say that in certain circumstances, in the highly altered environment that we see in the urban area, exotic trees do have a place, especially juxtaposed with some of the older colonial buildings.

There is another practical matter as well, and that is that the North Terrace precinct, especially with the design that was in fact proposed, did involve quite a lot of paving. There were very real concerns about the design and the effect that that would have in very hot weather. There was a concern to ensure that we had a significant amount of shade to allow people to enjoy that boulevard, especially during our hot summers. I think that was a lively concern and a real issue that obviously was alive in the minds of people who were expressing views about this development.

We considered that the spotted gum, as it was described at the time, did not really provide the sort of shade necessary to give people relief from a very hot summer—it provided only dappled shade—and that was very much a factor in the decision taken. I pay tribute to the honourable member and his campaign to lift the use of native plants and trees in South Australia; I strongly support that and will be taking steps to advance it with further initiatives of this government. However, that decision was taken, and it cannot be revisited without making a mess of the design of the whole North Terrace precinct.

I think it is worth pointing out that we did commit ourselves to going out to the community. We had a very extensive public consultation process and, overwhelmingly, people supported the plane tree option, as opposed to the spotted gum option. It was a very open process in which a lot of people participated, and that was the conclusion reached. So, it would actually be a bit of a breach of faith in that process, one which we undertook in good faith and by which we said we would abide, if we were to turn our back on that approach.

I believe most people accept that the North Terrace development and the decisions we made about it have led to a better outcome. It is a well-loved precinct, and the proposition of extending it further down North Terrace is an exciting one, which, I believe, should receive the support of the house. I am sure it will receive support from the community once it is established.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (12:07): I have the utmost respect for the minister. I think he is not only an excellent minister but also a good bloke, and that is about the highest tribute you can pay in Australia. To respond to the points he made, I believe that he, the Premier and the Lord Mayor were misled. The so-called consultation was so pathetic that even I did not know about it, and I take an interest in these things. They rang a few people and they had a display at the library (which was dodgy), and someone has since told me that they offered a digital presentation so that people could see North Terrace under various scenarios but that it was never taken up. If you want to do it properly, that is the way to do it: let people see what could be created by using various digital visual presentations and let them see what it would look like.

In terms of the type of tree, I am not saying that it has to be corymbia maculata, which is not a eucalypt anyway. There are about 800 eucalypts to choose from and over 1,000 acacias, as well as plenty of other species that are well suited to North Terrace. I acknowledge that what is there now is better than what was there before. One would be churlish and silly to say that what has been done does not look attractive, because it does. My argument is that it could have been done so that it had a South Australian or Australian look about it. I am not saying that what is there does not look good; I am saying that it could have looked a hell of a lot better and whole lot more Australian or South Australian. I am not being churlish about what is there.

On the question of the pavers, I think that they have been overdone. On one hand, we are trying to stop people putting stormwater into creeks and into the ocean yet, with North Terrace, here is the government and the city council trying to put more stormwater into those very areas. I will use the Premier's term, 'breaking news': people may not have heard about them, but there are now things available called porous pavers, and they could be used.

In terms of shade, there are plenty of native and South Australian species of trees that can give shade. You could mix and match, having native and exotic side by side; you could have part of North Terrace looking like old England and you could have the western side looking like modern Adelaide and modern Australia. Perth is an Australian-looking city, because not only does it have corymbia maculata in the main streets, it also has public gardens with bottlebrush and other natives. The Adelaide City Council still has not discovered the many indigenous or other native trees, shrubs and grasses that can be planted in the squares and on the terraces of our city.

I mentioned the consultation being dodgy. When I was at what is now UniSA, if anyone dished up that sort of work as a proper methodological approach to surveying people, they would have got about minus two for it. It was poor.

One of the reasons Tim Flannery wanted corymbia on North Terrace, apart from attracting birds and so on, was that you would get a dappled effect: you would be able to see the buildings as you go along North Terrace. You would be able to look over and see the museum and the library, for example. With those plane trees, you will get a lollipop effect. They will keep pruning it up until you get a lollipop and you will not be able to see those buildings as you go along from the other side because they will be covered with a dense mass of foliage, except during winter. That was one of his arguments; he wanted a dappled, see-through look. So, the usual argument about that is pretty thin, too.

Indigenous and native trees will provide the shade needed; I mentioned some of them before. Most South Australians have never heard of them, because most of them have been brought up to think of gum trees. In terms of the safety argument which some people trot out, the death rate from falling limbs is exactly the same in England as it is in Australia. The so-called widow-maker argument is fallacious, because the same number per million of population die in England where, to my knowledge, they do not have many eucalypts or corymbias. The same ratio die there as die in Australia, so that argument is a furphy and nonsense.

I know this is going to be a long-term campaign—and it may change after I am buried in a natural burial ground somewhere—but I look forward to the day when Adelaide actually looks Australian or South Australian, rather than a copy of something in Europe or England.

Motion negatived.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT