HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-03-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

MOUNT BARKER DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (14:46): l seek leave to make a ministerial statement.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: On Tuesday 5 March the Ombudsman released a report of his Investigation into the Procurement of Growth Investigation Areas (GIA) study. This GIA study was initiated following the 2008 State Planning and Development Review to assist the development of the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide. The Ombudsman has made a number of findings which reflect adversely on the procurement process by which the GIA study was commissioned and managed. This is clearly a matter of concern to me.

It is of great importance that public faith in the planning process is strengthened by the government's response to the Ombudsman's report. The selection of Mount Barker as a growth area was evidence-based and was not criticised by the Ombudsman. I note the Ombudsman's findings that conflicts of interest in relation to the Mount Barker investigation were not properly managed. It is incumbent on me as minister to address this. Today I advise the following:

1. I have directed my department to ensure that the internal procurement processes of the department are thoroughly reviewed in light of the Ombudsman's finding.

2. The planning department has significantly increased its capacity to deliver in-depth technical advice since 2008. This has significantly reduced the need to engage consultants and hence the risk of future conflict of interest issues of the nature identified by the Ombudsman.

3. I also note that planning is now part of the broader Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and operates under that department's procurement process.

4. I recently announced the appointment of an independent expert panel on planning reform, led by Mr Brian Hayes QC, to undertake a review of the Development Act, which will be 20 years old this year. Issues arising from the Ombudsman's report are within the remit of the panel's terms of reference. I have written to the panel to draw these matters to their attention.

5. I also note that the 30-year plan as a volume of the planning strategy is by law due for review by no later than February 2015.

This process will overlap with the work of the expert panel on planning reform which will report by the end of 2014. Given the overlap between the statutory time frame for the reviewing of the 30-year plan and the work of the expert panel, I will be seeking advice from the panel on the appropriate process for undertaking the statutory review of the 30-year plan.

The notion that the Ombudsman's findings should compel us now to abandon the 30-year plan or past rezonings is absurd. The plan remains, as it always has been, a policy strategy subject to ongoing monitoring and refinement. It is important in any debate to distinguish between areas in which the rezoning process has already been completed and undisturbed areas identified for possible future growth in the GIA. In the areas already rezoned, legal processes have existed to review or overturn any rezoning decision. This has not occurred in this case.

The Ombudsman's report concerns the procurement process. The choice of Mount Barker for rezoning is not questioned. As for the land identified for potential growth over the next 30 years, I want to make it perfectly clear that the government will proceed with extreme care to ensure the absence of conflicts of interest. We will also ensure that all requirements will be met to enable rezoning work to work smoothly, particularly infrastructure requirements. It is important to note paragraph 141 of the Ombudsman's report, which states:

I accept that Planning SA staff acted in good faith; that there was no intent to undermine the procurement process in seeking the capability statements; and that there was no intent to deceive the APU [being the Accredited Purchasing Unit].

I have reflected upon the report and have had the benefit of discussing it personally with the Ombudsman. This has reinforced to me that the issue at hand arises substantially in the context of the then PIRSA procurement process. I have discussed this matter with my colleague, minister O'Brien. We believe that the matters need to be brought to the attention of the procurement board. As such, the minister has asked the board to review their arrangements, particularly with the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and Renewal SA.

The Ombudsman has indicated to me that he has written to the Office of Public Integrity Establishment Team and provided a copy of his report, with a view to their consideration of what might be done about his expressed concerns regarding apparent maladministration. That having been done, there is no need for me to repeat the exercise. In other words, the matter is already in the hands of the OPI.

I also note, at paragraph 159, that the Ombudsman states:

Despite my views above, I comment that I found no evidence to suggest any substantive unfairness to any of the potential consultants or any capricious decision-making by Planning SA, as a result of Planning SA not communicating the evaluation criteria in the letter requesting capability statements, or the weightings.

Finally, having considered his report, I agree with the Ombudsman that the GIA report should be released. Accordingly, today I table the GIA report and all the technical working papers that were inputs into the development of the 30-year plan and the Mount Barker rezoning. These reports will confirm what the government has always maintained: that these were technical, analytical inputs into the 30-year plan and were not determinative of policy. Policy is determined by the government.

Mr Speaker, the steps I have outlined show the government's determination to address the issues the Ombudsman has identified in his report.

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