HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-05-03 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS

Mr PICCOLO (Light) (16:09): I rise today to talk about an issue regarding mobile telephone towers in my electorate. Mobile telephone services have become an integral part of everyday living, and telecommunications towers are a key part of this vital infrastructure. These towers vary in height from 15 to 50 metres and are dotted across the urban and rural landscapes. Telcos have been given widespread power and authority under planning laws to assist them to develop this network.

However, these towers do not exist in isolation and are often built in very close proximity to communities of people. My story today is an example of how a large Australian telecommunications company, namely Telstra, appears to have used its might and legal power to bludgeon a small community into submission rather than engage in a constructive dialogue with a community of responsible and reasonable residents.

Very recently, a 37-metre telecommunications tower has been built in the community of Hillier within my electorate. The community is characterised by a range of small rural allotments of two to four hectares on the flat plains west of Gawler. This is their story, and also mine, because I was very pleased and proud to support them.

In December 2008, Telstra put forward a planning proposal to Gawler council to build a tower at the corner of Winzor and Hillier roads. Telstra had chosen to build the tower in the most densely populated part of Hillier and the visual impact for several families was going to be very high, that is, dominating the nice skyline. After researching the planning laws, establishing what Telstra's technical needs were, working collaboratively with the Gawler council's development assessment panel and holding community information meetings, the residents identified more suitable sites in an area of between 200 and 400 metres to the north-east.

I need to just reinforce what the message of today's grievance is. At this stage, I need to emphasise an important fact. Not, at any stage, did the residents adopt a 'not in my backyard' stance. They went out of their way to achieve a workable solution which would meet the needs of the wider Australian community, the commercial needs of Telstra, and, importantly, reduce the visual impact of the tower for all the Hillier residents. Again, they did not take a 'nimby' stance at all. Delivered achievements included:

the residents were actively surveyed and supported the change;

it was established that Telstra's technical requirements for the tower would not be disadvantaged;

the support of three landowners in the proposed area was gained, who were prepared to volunteer their land, guarantee access and make it available to Telstra at a significantly reduced price. Telstra was free to choose which site it wanted to use; and

it worked closely with Gawler council's DAP who were very supportive of the residents' responsible and reasoned recommendations.

Repeated requests made separately and jointly by the residents, the Gawler DAP and myself for Telstra to work with the Hillier community were not only met with silence but occasionally with denial, legal threats and belligerence.

Telstra appears to have treated the residents of Hillier, the local planning authority and myself as the enemy, despite being given a wonderful opportunity to engage with the community and build something that met the needs of all the parties involved. Small communities and councils do not have the financial resources to challenge a huge company like Telstra in the courts—a point emphasised to me by a Telstra lawyer.

I am very proud of the efforts of the Hillier residents and the Gawler council who attempted bravely and persistently, over a long period of time, to act with reason and responsibility in an imposed environment of hostility, belligerence and arrogance. Unfortunately, we lost the fight, despite all our endeavours. Telstra has never shown any willingness to significantly vary its initial proposed site and, in my opinion, used the legislated planning laws as an excuse to impose its will.

The 37-metre tower has now been erected and is operating. The wider community has improved access to mobile technologies and that is a good thing. Telstra has looked after its commercial interests and that is a good thing. The residents of Hillier have a piece of communication infrastructure that dominates their skyline and will do so for a lifetime and that is not a good thing, especially when there were viable alternatives on the table.

Despite the disappointment, there may just be a ray of light emerging for the future. Vodafone (who, I am aware, has other problems in its business at the moment) has recently expressed concern with the conflict created in various communities by the tower construction process. They are showing very strong interest in developing and implementing a panel approach which would see local residents, local councils and Vodafone attempting to work together whenever they plan to build a tower in the community.

I commend Vodafone's proposed approach. It is not necessarily an easy road. I congratulate them and indicate my willingness to work with them to improve the process of citing telecommunication towers.

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