House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-10-13 Daily Xml

Contents

Gillman Land Sale

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:32): I have a final supplementary to the Attorney-General: if the new circumstances are in relation to receiving the money upon the preconditions set, why did the former minister for urban planning (now Treasurer) state, before the election, 'This deal is not about value for money, it's about jobs—6,000 to 12,000 jobs for South Australia'?

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform) (14:32): I have learned, in my time here, to be wary of deputy leaders bearing quotes. Just leave that one to one side. What was said, and what has been maintained all along, was that there were two aspects to this deal: the first one was the price being offered by ACP for that land was good value, full stop.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I am telling you what the advice was, and I am telling you that no—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Despite all of the chaff that has been thrown in the air by the deputy leader and others over a period of time, nobody has produced anything, including through any court process, to suggest that the valuation—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Kavel is warned for the second and final time.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: He is intimidating me, Mr Speaker.

Ms Vlahos interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Taylor is called to order.

Mr Gardner: She has been doing it all day, sir.

The SPEAKER: She has.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: The other point which was made was: there was an aspiration on the part of ACP at that time, which was entirely reasonable in the context of the then quite bullish view about the oil and gas sector here in South Australia, that there would be an opportunity to establish a hub very close to the Port, very close to rail and very close to major road networks—an ideal placement—and that, given the way in which these things are calculated—the way it works is, as I understand it, if you have X hectares of employment land, there is a rough rule of thumb that these people who are economic people use. It is per hectare—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I note that this is very scientific, but it is true. Per hectare of employment land, there is a general expectation that there will be a certain number of jobs if that land is disposed as employment land. So, what you do—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Let me put it another way that might be more helpful.

The SPEAKER: The member for Hartley is on two warnings.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: It might be more helpful if I put it this way: if you buy a paddock and you know the paddock can take two sheep per acre, if you multiply the number of acres in the paddock by two, you work out how many sheep you can have.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Taylor is warned.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The Treasurer is called to order.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I am trying to break through, Mr Speaker. Or, like the member for Finniss, who has some of the finest free-range chicken producers in the country, you can get much larger numbers than two per hectare. I think some of his producers are up in higher numbers than that and they are all running out free in the open air and having a lovely time. That is the nature of what we have said.

They said, 'Look, there is a bullish market expectation for oil and gas. We think we are going to be well positioned adjacent to transport connections, a port and the opportunity to be able to basically take business away that otherwise might migrate across to Queensland.' That was all a perfectly reasonable proposition at that point in time. Had that proceeded at that point in time, if you multiply the job-generating capacity of that type of industrial activity, you get the sort of numbers they were talking about.