HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-02-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Statutes Amendment (Barossa Rail Corridor) Bill

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (10:32): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Highways Act 1926 and the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (10:33): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

In moving this bill, I would like to outline some of its background and also its purpose. The purpose of the bill is essentially to protect the rail corridor between Gawler and Angaston, which is usually referred to as the Barossa rail corridor. The purpose of protecting that rail corridor is to enable in the future, if the opportunity arises, commencement of a Barossa tourism train service.

As a result of some work I have been doing in the Barossa over the last four, five or maybe six months now, it has become clear that there is some support amongst the business sector and the community to explore the feasibility of reintroducing some sort of model of a tourism train service. I say a 'tourism train service' because what is being looked at is the possibility of having some sort of heritage train service or a service that brings tourists to the area and through the area. That is not to be confused with a passenger rail service, which is a very different beast.

The bill does three things. It basically restricts the government from selling off any part of the rail corridor to any third parties. I am aware at this time that that rail corridor, like many other rail corridors throughout the state, is under the care and control of One Rail, formerly known as Genesee & Wyoming, which has care and control of that under a lease arrangement which goes back some years prior to this government.

The terms and conditions of that lease at this point in time are not known. What I do know is that those terms and conditions have been amended since we were in government. I know that because part of the leased area has been removed from the lease and taken back by the government into government hands to enable a roundabout to be built at what is referred to in the Barossa as Kroemer's Crossing.

As a result of the roundabout being built at Kroemer's Crossing, part of the railway track was dug up and, therefore, there is a break in the line. It is interesting to note that there is another intersection further north and a roundabout, which was built during our period, but we were able to preserve the rail line as part of that roundabout as well. It is of great controversy in the Barossa that the rail tracks were not maintained or retained as part of the Kroemer's Crossing development. There is a view that it was possible and there has also been a view expressed that it may be possible to reinstate the train lines should a case be made that a tourism train service would be feasible in the longer term.

So this bill prevents the government—this government, any government—from removing or selling off some land. Secondly, it defines what the corridor is. Essentially, the corridor is between Gawler and Angaston. Even though there is no rail line between Nuriootpa and Angaston, the belief is that the corridor should be protected in some way and that would leave the options open in the future for any other transport systems as well.

The other part is that, if the corridor is to be developed in any way—whether the bridges would go above the rail corridor or if there would be any other infrastructure—it would require the consent of this parliament. In other words, the people would know and it would need the consent of this parliament should this corridor be affected in a way that would prevent a train service from being reinstated.

This is just a holding mechanism to say that, until that feasibility is undertaken and we make some sort of final decision as to whether a tourism train service is viable or not, then the line and the corridor should be retained intact. Part of that is because we do not know the status of where the lease arrangements are at the moment. As I said, we know the lease arrangements were changed recently by virtue of the fact that the Kroemer's Crossing, which was part of the lease arrangements, had to be amended to hand back part of that lease to the state government to enable that roundabout to be built.

This is not an argument against a roundabout. Clearly, the roundabout was required. What it is saying is we do not want that to happen again where further parts of the track are dug up for development purposes. So that is what the bill does, in essence. In terms of the background to it, the issue of a tourism train service has been one which has been discussed for many years. In fact, until about 2002 at least, as far as I can recall, the train service ran because I know that in 2002 Her Majesty The Queen visited Gawler and also the Barossa.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: She did. I met Her Majesty. I was fortunate to meet Her Majesty at the Gawler station. I was mayor of the town at the time, so I welcomed her to our wonderful town. I spent some time with Her Majesty and then she went on to the Barossa. She arrived in Gawler on the Barossa Wine Train. There is certainly a strong affinity and desire by the community to have its rail service reinstated, albeit in this case for tourism purposes only.

One of the things we have done to ensure we go into this matter with our eyes wide open is that I have established a task force made up of some very important and prominent people, in the sense that their roles in the community mean they have extensive networks and understand the Barossa very well. For example, the task force has Peter Joy, the chair of the Barossa Grape and Wine Association. He would have networks around all the wineries and grapegrowers, an important part of the Barossa, and would understand how a tourism train service would benefit that particular part of the business community.

There is Jon Durdin, who is involved with Tourism Barossa. Again, that goes way beyond just grapegrowers and wineries to all the people involved in the tourism industry. He has extensive networks and knowledge on what the benefit and also the costs could be of this wine train. It is important that we do a proper and thorough feasibility study to make sure this proposed wine train would work.

What we are doing now is different from what has previously happened. There have been a number of reports prepared on this matter, the most recent an expression of interest undertaken by the government, which has not had the confidence of the people of the Barossa. It has been piecemeal, and they have often been called not to actually inform but rather to prevent the train service. Bim Lange, the Mayor of The Barossa Council, is a member of the task force, as is Karen Redman.

A tourism train would not only benefit the Barossa but could also be of great benefit to the Town of Gawler, particularly if it were to run between Gawler and the Barossa. Rod Hook, former CEO of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, is also a member of the task force He is an independent person but he also works for John Geber, the owner of Chateau Tanunda, a very successful winery. Rod brings a lot of actual experience, and his experience in this matter would be unparalleled because he worked for the department and understands how to cost projects, the challenges facing the project, etc. He brings a strong independent view to that task force—as do all its members.

The members of the task force have all been selected because they have either very strong pro or anti views about the proposed tourism train, and they also bring with them background and experience that are useful. Ivan Venning, the former member for Schubert, is a member of the task force. He would probably be one of the people who have very strong views about the tourism train, very pro views. He was also the member for Schubert for about 20 years or so and therefore has a great knowledge of the history of the train and previous services as well as the community's views about the service.

Bob Sampson, who is involved with the National Rail Museum, brings to the task force a lot of expertise in regulatory issues. He understands the difference between regulating a passenger train service and a heritage train service, as well as the extensive processes involved in trying to get a licence to operate such a train service. He brings a very strong knowledge of that process, having worked, I think, in both ANR and South Australian Railways. I think Bob has worked in both railways, and so his input is very valuable to the task force.

Marie-Louise Lees has just recently joined the task force, representing the Southern Barossa region. The Southern Barossa region is an area that sometimes believes they are left out of the Barossa or not considered part of the Barossa, but they certainly are part of the Barossa. There are quite a few commercial, business and community interests that are represented through Marie-Louise Lees. In fact, at the recent task force meeting on Monday night she tabled a document of all the various businesses and interests in the Southern Barossa that could benefit from a tourism train, and it is quite extensive, so there are enormous benefits to be found.

Rolf Binder is the chair of the RDA. The RDA is very strong on economic development and also connecting that to community. Rolf brings with him not only the business acumen of Rolf Binder Wines, which he owned until recent times, which I understand he has now sold to another party, but also the networks that the RDA has in the Barossa area, so we have a very strong task force. Its meetings are very rigorous and robust, which they should be. The task force at the moment is preparing a document that could become a project brief to undertake a feasibility study.

It has been public knowledge that, should my side of politics win government at the next election—we do not have to win Schubert to win government, although for a few months that was a good idea, but that is not going to be the case now—we have committed ourselves to fund the feasibility study, and this is a thorough feasibility study.

The oversight of the study will not be some public servant in the Department for Transport at the direction of a minister or a senior public servant but it would be a taskforce made up of local people. The local people who I have just mentioned will oversee this process and will have a lot of confidence. The idea of having this feasibility is that the outcomes of this feasibility will be accepted by the community and the business sector.

The task before the task force includes looking at the range of benefits for the Barossa and Gawler region from a tourism train and, importantly, how it is congruent with the Barossa brand—the Barossa brand is a premium brand in tourism and we do not want to detract from it—and how it could add to that brand. Therefore, the service that you would provide would complement and not detract from it.

It would also look at the management of the rail corridor, should this go ahead. It would also look at, very importantly, the potential for private sector investment that could be unlocked with a tourism train in that area and what role the private sector would play. It would also look at the issue of Kroemer's Crossing and whether the line could be reinstated and whether the model of the train service would be from Gawler to Tanunda or Gawler to Nuriootpa and beyond.

There is a whole range of other things, but in essence it is designed to ensure that any reintroduced train service would be sustainable and be of long-term benefit to the Barossa. But to be able to do that we need a rail corridor, and the only way we can guarantee to have a rail corridor is to pass this bill that protects the rail corridor from any other actions by this government to dig up the train line. With those comments, I would certainly ask the house to support the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Dr Harvey.

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