HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-04-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (BOUNDARY REFORM) AMENDMENT BILL

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (10:39): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Local Government Act 1999. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (10:40): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I will be brief with this bill and the others that are on the Notice Paper. This is essentially a reintroduction of a bill that I first introduced in 2010. It simply creates a commission to look at the boundaries of metropolitan councils and to determine how many councils there should be and where the boundaries should be. This is a model used successfully in New Zealand. I believe it is the best way to go about that issue.

We hear from time to time some people saying that Adelaide should have one council; some people are saying two, three or four. We currently have 19 from Gawler to Noarlunga. I think the best and most sensible approach that takes it out of the arena of just a dogfight or a catfight (or whatever you want to call it) is to have a retired judge or someone similar look at the question of the boundaries and the number of councils. That is essentially and simply what this bill seeks to create.

As I say, it has worked very well in New Zealand because everyone can make a submission, everyone can have their say and all the experts and others have their input. I think this is an appropriate way to go because otherwise this issue will just keep dragging on. We have people from time to time, as I say, making suggestions about how many councils there should be. Unless you look at it in a proper, sensible, rational way based on research and other factors, then anyone's guess is as good as anyone else's. I commend this bill to the house. I think it has merit and I think it is time that we as a parliament—

Mr Pegler interjecting:

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: The ever vigilant member for Mount Gambier points out that on page 3—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: He is good. That's why they elected him. On page 3, sir, there is a typographical error. It says 'not later than 30 June 2011, cause copies of the report to be laid before [parliament]'. I know some people are very capable, but I do not think we have the retrospective power to do that, so that should be changed to 30 June 2013. I think it is a bit close to make it 2012. With the indulgence of the house, I will ask that that typographical error be changed to 2013 on page 3. With those words, I commend the bill to the house.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We have picked up the mistake. The bill will be corrected.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: Further, sir, on page 4 that should be 31 December 2013. I do not blame parliamentary counsel. I should have checked it myself. Both those dates should be changed to 2013, rather than 2011 on page 3 and 2012 on page 4.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Griffiths.

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