HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-11-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Motions

Buckland Park Intersection

Mr ELLIS (Narungga) (11:33): I move:

That this house—

(a) acknowledges the extraordinary inconvenience placed on motorists thanks to the installation of the traffic lights on Port Wakefield Road at Buckland Park;

(b) notes that the Buckland Park intersection boasts the only set of traffic lights between Port Adelaide and Port Augusta;

(c) recognises that the traffic lights undermine the good work by successive governments in improving traffic flow along the north-south corridor; and

(d) requests an immediate upgrade to the Buckland Park intersection to reverse this short-sighted decision and return traffic to a free flow model.

It is wonderful to kickstart private members' motions today with a motion that is particularly important to the people of Narungga. The set of traffic lights that has been installed has been quite the cause of concern in my electorate. That is not to undermine the wonderful work being done to improve housing stock in the state.

We all recognise the dire shortage of houses that we have in electorates right across South Australia. Surely, this work by a private investor to provide more opportunities for more housing stock at Buckland Park is welcome to help remediate that problem to some degree, but I have to say that the installation of traffic lights at the entrance to that new development is causing a great deal of concern.

In the motion, I touch on the work done by successive governments when it comes to improving traffic flow and that has been really welcomed by our community. I only have to reminisce that, a few years ago, for me personally, it was a door-to-door trip of just over two hours from my home in Kadina to where we stayed in Adelaide. That trip has got down a lot closer to 90 minutes now with the installation of the Northern Connector and that is, by and large, thanks to the removal of traffic lights and having to stop regularly along that way.

It has been really welcomed, particularly by truck drivers and farmers who have to go to Port Adelaide to either collect or drop off grain or materials. It has been a wonderful innovation and governments should be congratulated on expending public funds on an initiative that has been so welcomed by our community. But, as I said, it is a cause of great frustration in the community and a great deal of confusion too, it must be said, when, despite the wonderful work that has been done by governments, there suddenly pops up a set of traffic lights in the midst of that work.

I have constituents who could not for the life of them figure out why, after all that wonderful work removing traffic lights to improve the flow and shorten the travel time, suddenly there was another set of traffic lights being put up. It did not make sense to them. It does not make sense to me, and it has caused a great deal of disappointment. I really do share that disappointment with my constituents and hopefully we can get something fixed in a rather short time.

As a frequent user of that road, as I started to see the works being done on that site at Buckland Park, I began to investigate what might be happening out there and what the plan might be for that site. It became apparent quite quickly to me that it would be a concern for the people of Narungga and I took action as soon as I could. There are some things that come through the door as a member of parliament where you do not know what the mood of the community might be and it requires a great deal of consultation, but for this particular matter it became quite apparent quite quickly that it would be a cause for considerable concern in the community.

On 4 March 2021, I first spoke in this house about the installation of the traffic lights and the concern it had caused for the people of Narungga. That followed a letter on 5 February 2021 to the then Minister for Transport and Infrastructure advocating that, in the interests of traffic flow and noting the construction of those lights, they not be turned on until such a time as there was a significant enough population that was living at Buckland Park to justify them being turned on.

I advocated in that letter that that was the only way we could determine whether it would be necessary in the immediate term for those lights to be turned on. If we waited to see what the traffic flow was like before we turned them on, we could have a better understanding of what might be needed out there. Unfortunately, that letter fell on deaf ears. It was not agreed to by the then government and by the then minister and those lights went ahead and were built and turned on as was planned.

However, we did receive in the reply to that letter some confirmation from the then minister about the plans that would follow at Buckland Park. They included, upon the sale of approximately 9,000 allotments, that a grade separation would be developed there to speed up traffic. That is the number of allotments that has been adjudicated as giving rise to the requirement for a grade separation to return traffic flow to what it once was. We were told, as constituents in Narungga, that we ought to wait until such a time as that many allotments were sold and then our problems would be solved and things would go away.

I would contend that we need a more immediate fix than that. We need to get stuck into solving that problem now so that our constituents can continue to travel from Yorke Peninsula to Adelaide and back without this inconvenience. I quote from the letter dated 5 March from Minister Wingard:

The construction of the Grade separated overpass at this location is dependent on the progress of the development and population growth in future years—

and that—

DIT is investigating the installation of advance warning signs on Port Wakefield Road to provide drivers (especially heavy vehicle operators) enough notice that there will be a change of lights at the intersection.

Following that correspondence, the number of constituents coming to me to complain and to voice their concerns about the issue did not abate. We continue to get a large number of people visiting the electorate office and bailing me up in the street with their concerns.

I wrote to the minister in July 2021 voicing those concerns once again and advocating for a warning sign. We wanted a sign that provided warning for people driving along that road that the lights were about to change, that there was an impending yellow light coming up and that they should begin slowing down and get ready to stop.

Unfortunately, what happened was that we had those warning lights installed—although some might contend that they are probably not far enough away from the actual intersection—but they now flash in perpetuity. Those lights are flashing 24/7, warning of upcoming traffic lights, which means they are doing absolutely nothing. It is like the person studying for an exam who highlights the whole page of paper: it does not draw attention to any one thing.

The proper course of action for the department would have been to make sure that those lights flash when the light is about to change, to provide a warning that the light is about to change so that the truck drivers with fully laden trucks can begin the process of slowing down. Precious few of us in this chamber would fully appreciate—especially not me—the difficulty of bringing a fully loaded truck to a stop. It is not an easy process, and it is my contention that the warning lights that we have now installed are not doing that job. They are not providing enough warning and could do with that change.

I have had contact with truck drivers from around the electorate who have had the privilege of travelling around our great country and who have seen those lights working in that way in other states, so surely there is no reason that it cannot work here in South Australia. I wrote again to the new minister after the election, bringing that to his attention, and I am awaiting a response from him. I have had a couple of conversations with him and I am hoping that we can bring about that change to provide more warning, particularly for those truck drivers, to make sure that they are warned of an impending light change not an impending intersection. That is the key thing for our constituents.

That is what I am working on now. It is something that I have been desperately trying to bring to the attention of the decision-makers over a prolonged period, and this motion is the next iteration of that action. I think the key word in this motion is that we desire 'immediate' action. It is imperative that we get stuck into fixing this problem right now. It cannot wait. We should not have to wait for 9,000 allotments to be sold. We should be able to get stuck into providing a solution for the people not just of my electorate but of the northern part of this wonderful state.

This motion is about bringing about immediate action from the government. I reckon if I had $1 for every constituent who had approached me requesting a change for this electorate, I would be able to fund the improvements myself. That should be enough evidence for the government to take immediate action. There is clearly a desire within the community. There are clearly safety concerns.

Perversely, those lights that have been put up in that place are, in the view of some, providing a more dangerous situation than otherwise might have been there. When those lights change suddenly and you have a fully loaded truck, it is very difficult to stop, and skidding through that intersection could, perversely, provide a more dangerous situation than otherwise might have been there.

As I said, this motion is the latest iteration in a prolonged series of works that I have undertaken to try to secure a solution at Buckland Park intersection. It is not to degrade the wonderful work being done to provide a greater level of housing stock in the state, but we certainly need to return that traffic to a free-flowing model. The wonderful work done by successive governments on the Northern Connector and at Port Wakefield was really welcomed by my community, and I am sure if we can fix this problem at Buckland Park it will be welcomed as well.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:43): I rise to speak on the motion by the member for Narungga:

That this house—

(a) acknowledges the extraordinary inconvenience placed on motorists thanks to the installation of the traffic lights on Port Wakefield Road at Buckland Park;

(b) notes that the Buckland Park intersection boasts the only set of traffic lights between Port Adelaide and Port Augusta;

(c) recognises that the traffic lights undermine the good work by successive governments in improving traffic flow along the North South Corridor; and

(d) requests an immediate upgrade to the Buckland Park intersection to reverse this short-sighted decision and return traffic to a free flow model.

It is to be noted that there is some work being done; the projections are that 33,000 residents will be at Buckland Park by 2036.

Obviously over time there have been concerns about it being on the Gawler River flood plain. It is an area where my past generations lived and worked over many years before coming down to Coomandook. In fact, back in the late 1840s, after my family left the initial farm at Plympton, which they had settled in 1840, they went out to Gawler River and then subsequently to Angle Vale. We had land along Heaslip Road and part of that is now the RAAF Base Edinburgh.

In regard to this motion, in 2010 the Walker Corporation was given approval for the construction of what was slated as a $2 billion satellite town called Riverlea, just north of Buckland Park. The name Buckland Park comes from an old homestead in the region. Once complete, Riverlea is expected to become home to over 30,000 residents, with another 10,000 added to that number in the years following. Around 12,000 homes will be built to accommodate the population, with 10,000 new jobs likely to be created within the satellite town and surrounding precincts.

The entrance to Riverlea is via Riverlea Boulevard, which is directly opposite Angle Vale Road as you travel along Port Wakefield Road. In February 2021, traffic lights were installed on Port Wakefield Road at the abovementioned intersection to give access to Riverlea. The speed limit was reduced from 110 km/h to 90 km/h on approach to the intersection. It is understood a four-way signalised intersection was a condition of the Walker Corporation's development approval.

As has already been explained by the member for Narungga, motorists used to be able to travel from Port Adelaide to Port Augusta without encountering any traffic lights. The installation of traffic lights at the Buckland Park intersection has now interrupted that free-flowing movement of traffic along Port Wakefield Road and this goes against the purpose of the north-south corridor to be a nonstop major route for north and southbound traffic. It is a major inconvenience for motorists and heavy freight vehicles in particular: heavy freight travelling at about 100 km/h and other vehicles travelling at about 110 km/h are suddenly forced to stop.

Traffic lights do not belong on major freight routes, which is why the government should be prioritising an upgrade to the Buckland Park intersection so that Port Wakefield Road can return to being a free-flowing traffic route. In fact, the current Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, the Hon. Tom Koutsantonis, said the following in parliament on 7 July 2022 in reference to Port Wakefield Road, and I quote, 'It does look ridiculous to have a set of traffic lights on that section of road.'

With this development coming onstream in the last couple of decades, it has been an issue for quite a few people, and the flood threat has been referred to in the media multiple times. We are told by the developers that flood threat is mitigated. I know it is not directly related to this, but it is interesting to look at what is happening with the River Murray at the moment in flood and in a high water situation. I can tell you, high water is far better than what we saw 16 years ago, when we were in severe drought and could not get water to the mouth of the mighty River Murray.

It is something to be aware of. When we see flooding happening interstate at places such as Lismore with the high rainfall, it is certainly something to take into account. I hope that the mitigation methods put in place at Buckland Park do activate appropriately for that settlement of Riverlea.

In relation to the transport options heading out of Port Adelaide to Port Augusta and all points in between, one thing that freight route has is the advantage of taking two-trailer road trains all the way through until they get to Port Augusta, where they can then hook up the third one to go to Alice Springs and Darwin. It is a great asset to have those big units that can come straight out of the port, whether they are taking produce north or they have brought export commodities in. It could be grain, it could be a whole range of commodities, but it is certainly a really efficient way of getting freight to Yorke Peninsula, the Mid North and the Upper North with those options of having two-trailer road trains.

There is certainly an issue with having to pull up or back off when you see those yellow lights flashing continuously, as members said, knowing those lights are there. It is not that simple to pull up with that much weight. You might have close to a 70-tonne rig by the time you have the freight onboard. It would be far better to have the grade separation in place.

It is said that getting to 9,000 residents is part of the deal, and that will take place. It will be an expensive process, but what does need to happen—and it needs to happen sooner rather than later—is freeing up the that route for freight as well as for people going about their day-to-day business, whether that is connecting through to Yorke Peninsula, the Mid North, the Upper North or Far North. That is the way you get efficiencies for people on their much-needed trips into Adelaide or for that much-needed freight going either way.

On this side of the house, we believe there should be immediate action taken to free up that freight route so that people have the best access they can have, whether they are heading north or whether, a lot of the time, they are bringing that much-needed export capability into Port Adelaide.

The ability to take two-trailer road trains straight in is something to be treasured. Obviously, as I have mentioned here before, you cannot do that on the South Eastern Freeway, for obvious reasons. You can take B-doubles, but there is plenty of freight now that goes around the northern freight route, around the Sturt Highway and around the Halfway House turnoff to come south through to Sedan and Mannum and then to Murray Bridge, where we can get the bigger combinations, whether they be road trains or the AB-doubles, the B-triples and B-quads.

This is a very commendable motion from the member for Narungga. I can imagine how many times he has been lobbied on this. I hope he is saving all those dollars, if he gets them, for every constituent who comes to him, to assist in the remediation of this problem. I urge the government to have a serious look at this. It is about creating somewhere for people to live very close to the urban environment, but we have to make it convenient for the rest of regional South Australia not just to go about their business but to go about their life as well. I commend the motion.

Ms PRATT (Frome) (11:53): I rise to speak to this motion and thank the member for bringing it to the house and for his continued pursuit of this issue. I certainly share his frustration on behalf of the many constituents of Frome who are also affected by this; in fact, before you put your toe into the seat of Narungga you will have driven through the electorate of Frome, once crossing the Gawler River.

I would like to take you back in time—we will do a bit of time travel—back to the dark days of 2010. This morning in the house the opposition have needed to reflect on those dark days of the Labor legacy, the former Premier and of course the infamous 'media Mike' Rann, a legacy of an era of government that had no regard for regional SA or anything that was of benefit to regional South Australia north of Gepps Cross.

This was a time of a profligate Labor government focused only on making city-centric deals—for example, selling off the Glenside mental health hospital. We remember the St Clair and Cheltenham racecourse open space debacle, and here we are discussing, as it turns out, a deal with Walker Corporation for a development that would occur 12 years into the future.

Fast-forward, and we are now witnessing a welcome housing boom in the area of the Adelaide Plains. Just a few metres down the road from this intersection, as one crosses the Gawler River and approaches the township of Two Wells, we are seeing this town grow at a speedy rate, with over 3,000 families set to live in and around the township just down the road from Riverlea.

Property developers Hickinbotham's, in partnership with Xavier College, have worked closely with the Adelaide Plains Council to deliver affordable housing on larger blocks within this fabulous country town of Two Wells. The community here is brimming with opportunity and development, and we are seeing large numbers of student enrolments increasing with families relocating. This only adds to the traffic on the road.

As prospective families scout out new housing developments across the Northern Adelaide Plains, they are scrupulously checking the capacity for infrastructure opportunities and impediments. I would argue that locals from Lewiston to Mallala would agree that this intersection at Riverlea is an impediment. Roughly $564 million was invested in the Northern Expressway and those who use it welcome it, but its purpose was to create a free-flowing traffic experience, I guess, yet Labor gifted us this congestion maker and it certainly defies logic.

You can drive from Wingfield to Waikerie in the fabulous electorate of Chaffey and you will not hit a traffic light until you get across the border to Mildura. You can drive from Brompton to the Barossa. You can drive from Croydon to Clare. But you cannot drive from Port Adelaide to Port Augusta. The mind boggles at the lack of logic that has forced upon us an intersection that, to reflect on previous members' comments, is an impediment and a safety issue.

In recognising that the new satellite town of Riverlea will expand roughly to about 12,000 homes, we should expect that there will be at least one vehicle for each home, and I think it is probably fair to guess that there would be two. It is not hard to imagine the volume of traffic we are going to see just attached to the Riverlea housing estate, but that does not factor in the people who are using it now.

The member for Narungga, the member for Flinders and certainly the member for Frome are using this gateway frequently. We have a future housing boom in Riverlea. We have families already relocating or establishing themselves in the Two Wells district. We have touched on the important freight route that this is and the volume of traffic that travels through it. Of course, the Marshall Liberal government happily invested heavily in the dual overpass at Port Wakefield, so we understood as a government the importance of investing in free-flowing traffic thoroughfares for our truckies and our freight route.

I made a commitment to get my MR (medium rigid) licence just so that I could drive the school bus. The member for Narungga reflected on the lag time required for road trains to slow down, and as a former school bus driver I certainly know about the care you need to take on the roads with those loads, so I cannot imagine the stress they feel when lights are constantly flashing and not giving them an opportunity to reflect on the changing lights at the intersection.

Certainly, in my electorate of Frome, this has been raised as a frustration for particular communities around Mallala, Korunye, Redbanks, those who live at Two Wells who are using it and all the way up the highway and along the coastal towns of Port Parham, Webb Beach, Middle Beach, Thompson Beach, Dublin, Lower Light and Windsor—and that is just the electorate of Frome. I would argue and politely suggest that residents in the neighbouring electorates of Taylor, Playford and Light might like to get in touch with their local Labor members and have a similar conversation and a 'please explain'.

For my own residents of Frome—and they are the ones I represent fervently on this issue—the frustration they feel, the safety issues they have raised, their concern about a growing population and of course their frustration at the lack of logic all come back to the member's motion, in which he is calling for immediate action from this current Labor government. I certainly concur with my colleagues that attention needs to be given to this intersection. With those closing remarks, I commend the motion.

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (12:01): I rise to speak in support of this motion from the member for Narungga and highlight that there is a significant portion of our state which, if they are travelling into Adelaide, they have to traverse this intersection. Port Wakefield Road, in particular, is a significant and predominant north-south freight route for our state as it makes its way into Port Adelaide. I do note that the traffic lights put into this intersection are now the only set of traffic lights that exists between Port Adelaide and Port Augusta.

The productivity of our state really hinges on having appropriate and effective freight routes right across. In the discussion that has been had I certainly note the points that have been made about the increasing domestic population and domestic use of this road, and that this intersection is not one that should be underestimated. We do need to make sure that motorists in their domestic vehicles are kept safe in the most effective way.

The point I want to make sure we truly understand in this place when we are debating this motion—and the minister and his department when they are looking at this intersection, in particular—is the need for a clear, uninterrupted freight route for our significant freight movements, the day-to-day and week-to-week freight movements with significant tonnage.

There is also the seasonal freight, which, in a season like we have this year in South Australia, is going to be significant. Indeed, the productive lands of the seat Narungga are always at high levels of production, and this is reflected in the tonnages that come from the member for Narungga's seat into Port Adelaide. There is a significant part of the state that does vary more seasonally, and our agricultural production does.

In seasons like we have had this year—fingers crossed, if the produce gets into the bins and into the trucks—there is going to be a significant amount of truck movement through that intersection and all the way to Port Adelaide. Port Adelaide is the most significant export facility that we have in the state, and the vast majority of the tonnage that is exported goes out of that port. With the significant season and the significant tonnage that is coming down to Port Adelaide, there are going to be extra interactions between domestic vehicles and heavy vehicles.

I do lament that there are not too many in this place who have had the unique experience of driving a heavy vehicle. Not too many, I am sure, would have their HC licence, not too many would have their road train licence, but I do encourage members on both sides to take the opportunity, if they get it, to go for a ride in a road train in particular, to realise the incredible skill which our operators have to develop and deal with in interactions with vehicles all the way along.

To have vehicles of 45, 55, 65, 75 tonne, it takes a significant period of time to stop that vehicle and also to get it going again. If we have an intersection where there are vehicles coming to a complete stop—as I said, up to 75-tonne road trains coming to a complete stop—firstly, there is the wear and tear on the vehicles themselves, and secondly is the danger of having a significant number of domestic vehicles interacting with those road trains and not understanding the lead-up time that is needed for a stop.

As someone who has driven heavy vehicles quite a lot, I am always surprised at how little concern people driving vehicles have in their interactions and how often vehicles cut in front of braking trucks, not knowing that there is a significant braking period that is needed. You cannot stop in a short period of time when you have a 75-tonne vehicle that you are in charge of.

This is why this intersection and the nonsensical nature of it has really caught the ire of not just those from the regions but especially those who are driving these heavy vehicles. That is why the member for Narungga, the member for Frome and myself as the member for Flinders—and I am sure the members for both Stuart and Giles—have had plenty of contact with members of our community to really just ask why is this intersection in place. Why, when we had a perfectly well-flowing thoroughfare for our vehicles and our trucks, did we decide to put traffic lights in the middle of it?

I understand and I certainly explain to my people that it is because of the development that has happened. In reflection of the motion that the member for Narungga has put, I think the time is now for us to recognise that this development will be happening. These houses will be built, these residences will be in place, this intersection will be and does need to be upgraded, so why not get moving on it now?

We know that there is a threshold for a 9,000 allotment sale for the grade separation to be put in place; we have heard that here in this place. We know that the land there is available, we know that the plans have been put together for this grade separation, so why not do it now? Agricultural communities in South Australia are getting more and more productive. There are more and more tonnes that are going to be coming down this road and the freight movements of general freight are going to increase more and more. That means that these heavy vehicles will have to traverse this thoroughfare and this intersection in increasing numbers throughout the years.

I am in full support of this motion in recognition of that and in recognition that the most effective freight route is one that is uninterrupted and one where heavy vehicles in particular are not having to come to a stop and are not having to accelerate after coming to a stop and where the extra wear and tear, fuel load and safety challenges will be negated by having an investment in this intersection. Once again, I commend the motion from the member for Narungga and especially reflect on paragraph (d), which is that the house:

(d) requests an immediate upgrade to the Buckland Park intersection to reverse this short-sighted decision and return traffic to a free flow model.

Traffic lights in this place really do undermine the good work that successive governments have done in improving the north-south corridor. Proper investment into productive infrastructure such as this grade separation can be well justified by those making decisions—the minister and his department—and I think it would be well supported by those who use this road, not just those of us who use it often but those who use it less frequently, like those opposite in metropolitan seats. I commend the motion.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI (Unley) (12:09): I rise to support the motion and congratulate the member for Narungga on bringing this to the house. Picking up on some of the points that the member for Flinders raised, there are allotments there that are for sale. There is a housing shortage. There is demand. We are hearing a slowdown is happening because of interest rate rises, but we are certainly not seeing that here in South Australia. You can understand the urgency of having lights there initially, when that was basically a civil construction site, so that trucks could enter and leave safely, but now that we are seeing the development progressing it is time for some spend on infrastructure.

I am very pleased to be able to stand here as the person who was the shadow minister for transport when we announced the Port Wakefield bypass and bridge solution to the bottlenecks we saw at peak periods of holidays and other times at that intersection off to Yorke Peninsula. As someone who lives in the inner southern suburbs, less than two kilometres from the centre of Victoria Square—I did not always live there, of course; Buckland Park was where I used to ride motorbikes as a kid when I was growing up in Salisbury—the experience you have is that those who live in different parts of Adelaide can get around quite easily. To get to our regions easily by the north-south corridor, which unfortunately is being now delayed by this government, it is important that we remove those barriers and make a daytrip into our regions as easy as possible.

I know that people who spend most of their time driving in the suburbs might get a little bit nervous on country roads. I can understand how people would feel nervous or confused on a road such as the Northern Expressway, having all of a sudden a set of lights popping up out of nowhere when they have travelled all the way from even the Minister for Transport's electorate of West Torrens on the north-south corridor.

It is the first set of lights that they come across on the freeway, and now of course they are operated much more per hour because they are activated by people at the lights. There are people who are living there and using that development much more than just the traffic that was there for the civil construction, so I agree with the immediacy that the member for Narungga has emphasised in his motion.

There is no doubt that many South Australians have discovered the wonders and the beauty of regional South Australia and take opportunities to go out to the regions for weekends or even daytrips. A day trip to Yorke Peninsula would have been unheard of probably a generation ago, but now it is very easily achieved with the road system. Barriers like this might put some people off from taking that daytrip if they have a bad experience at that intersection.

Having a grade separation and managing that intersection in a safe manner, like we did with the overpass at Port Wakefield, will make the journey safer for people who are not necessarily used to country driving. There are no surprises. I think accidents happen when there are surprises. We know that most accidents are caused by human error, but you can minimise the chance of human error happening by removing or minimising the risk.

Now is the time to put the infrastructure in. There is no development around that corner; there is no doubt there will be in a decade's time in response to the population growth that is happening in that area. Of course, if that happens it is a much bigger job, and there may be requirements for compulsory acquisition of land in order to do that. We are seeing that happening with the north-south corridor, and we are seeing that happening with intersection upgrades in my electorate of Unley where there have been compulsory acquisitions of land because there is simply not the physical room to improve those intersections without acquiring more land.

It makes a lot of sense, while you have the access and while the encumbrances of development are not there, to move forward on this project. Unless the government is predicting that we are going to see zero population growth, that demand for housing is going to drop off here in South Australia and that development is going to fail, I could perhaps then understand their not committing to an immediate solution for that intersection, but we know that is not the case.

During the Marshall government in particular—when people realised that there were things happening here in South Australia—people were returning to South Australia, people were coming to South Australia and we actually reversed the brain drain. We saw more people coming to South Australia than leaving, and we want that to continue because generates more opportunities for our young people, and we also want those who are of retirement age to stay here and retire in South Australia, and when they do that of course they spend a lot more leisure time discovering our state, and access roads in and out of the metropolitan area should make it very easy for them to do that.

The safer the roads are, the more city people use them and the more money will be spent supporting regional communities in South Australia, and we need those regional communities to grow. If we look at differences in the size of regional communities in South Australia compared with the size of regional towns and cities in other states, in Tasmania, for example, you have probably around 300,000 people living in Hobart, but the next largest city, Launceston, has about 90,000 people. Here in South Australia you have 1.3 million people living in Adelaide, with the next largest city, Mount Gambier, at 25,000 people.

Having larger regional cities will mean there will be more services in the region, there will be more reason for people to go there to experience those cities and there will be more job opportunities and more reasons to stay. There is a bit of a carrot or a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, but vibrancy in regional South Australia relies on easy access to regional South Australia, and this is just one piece of the puzzle. The member for Narungga has recognised how important it is for this work to be done, and done immediately, for the benefit of those regions north of Adelaide that really are significant contributors to the South Australian economy.

There is no doubt that with the investments that the Marshall government initiated in vegetable protein—we know lots of vegetable protein is produced north of Adelaide—we now have that opportunity for the processing and manufacturing of vegetable protein products for export in South Australia. We will see again, as the member for Flinders said, more freight on the roads, more activity between the metropolitan area, Port Adelaide and the regions as that industry grows, and that will spark growth in other industries.

As you can see, it does not take me very long to list the reasons why now is the time for this intersection to have grade separation so that it is done, it does not inhibit tourism, it does not inhibit the industrial growth of the regions, the agricultural growth of the regions and the industrialisation of agriculture happening in the regions. Of course, I am sure there will be other speakers who will speak about similar projects that should be conducted in their own electorates.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (12:19): I rise to lend my support to this motion. I commend the member for Narungga for bringing it to the house. I intend to speak very briefly this morning and to perhaps highlight a couple of elements that have been contributed already in the debate. I commend the member for Narungga for highlighting the need to get on and implement the grade separation at the Riverlea development.

I want to perhaps pick up on a couple of particular aspects of the motion. I do not know at paragraph (b) if the location might properly be described as 'boasting a set of traffic lights'; they are certainly there. I hope that, as the member for Narungga is on his travels and recording history at that location, and documenting the interests of his local community in seeing his good work in accelerating the progress to grade separation, there might be some historical record kept of what I hope is a temporary anomaly at that location.

I think the message that this parliament will be sending today to all South Australians is that when local members speak up about what their community is experiencing, they are then contributing to an appreciation across the parliament, throughout the community, of the importance of where this leads us.

I want to make it very clear that I am for the growth of our regions, our regional towns and regional industries, and I am for making sure that we are doing all we can to invest not only in making it easier for the residential developments to have access to the city but to have a much greater ambition than the evolution of what, without more, can be the provision of dormitories for access to jobs and activities that go on in Adelaide. I think we ought to have a regional-centred approach that says what we want to be doing is finding opportunities for work and innovation and life and the fabric of community that is to be found in the regions, and it is so important that we have infrastructure that makes that possible.

I want to highlight the contributions from the member for Hammond and the member for Flinders in particular, and also the member for Frome, in reflecting on the challenges for heavy freight in navigating that particular part of the road for the hopefully short period of time that this set of traffic lights is there because I am constantly humbled and impressed by the can-do and flexible attitude of those who have the challenge to drive a heavy vehicle along that road. They have to bring the produce in and take heavy equipment out.

Let's not forget the imposition that is placed on those heavy vehicle operators over this time. They can easily be forgotten. We can talk a lot about the development that is occurring, and that is really important with lots of new homes and that is wonderful, but keep in mind the work that those highly skilled operators of heavy vehicles do daily as they are navigating their way around our large state. Improved infrastructure makes their job a great deal easier. When the imposition of a set of traffic lights is forcing a complete stop along a stretch that really ought to be uninterrupted, then there are all sorts of risks and difficulties attendant upon that.

Let's be sure to see that the grade separation is implemented as a matter now of urgent priority. We know that grade separation is a condition of development that must be on its way once we reach the threshold of houses, but much like any area in which there is a transformation of use we need to understand that the developer is doing their bit to keep up pace, that the government is making sure that is pressed on with and that, in the interests of all road users and the state as a whole, we get to a point where we have that proper status of the road with a grade separation installed.

All strength to the member for Narungga as he continues to prosecute that case on behalf of his local members. I thank him for bringing this motion to the house. I commend it and look forward to supporting its passage.

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (12:25): It gives me great pleasure to stand and speak in favour of this motion from the member for Narungga. I understand many of his concerns when he raises this piece of infrastructure and how it might be affecting his seat of Narungga and the constituents within it, and not just the seat of Narungga but every seat beyond this point heading north: Stuart, Frome, Giles, Flinders and the like.

We as regional members—as the member for Narungga is and as many who have spoken on this topic are—understand the tyranny of distance, road quality and road safety. This may be a really important piece of infrastructure for road safety. As soon as I see something like this, though, the first thing I ask, and I ask this parliament, I ask this side of politics and I ask the other side of politics is: when you travel up and down the Pacific Highway how many stoplights do you see in a three or four-lane piece of infrastructure highway when you are travelling at 110 km/h and there are a number of towns and intersections to encompass that Pacific Highway?

They do not put stoplights there: they put massive roundabouts there so it keeps the flow of traffic, for example. I am not sure whether the member for Narungga is happy about a roundabout, but I can tell you that if they stuck stoplights in every intersection of the Pacific Highway there would be traffic banked back to Melbourne going to Brisbane. That is what it does to traffic and to traffic flow.

It also then comes back to efficiency of transport. As mentioned by those who have spoken already about the regional areas, transport and tyranny of distance are based on time and energy and it has a huge cost. As everyone would know, rising energy costs are going out of control. It is adding to the cost of living, it is adding to the cost of food and the like and then it is actually affecting the most vulnerable in our society.

Why would I bring up something like this when we are talking about stoplights at an intersection heading north of Adelaide? Because it is all encompassing for this state to recognise that it is not just one piece of infrastructure that is the problem. I could name many elements of our road infrastructure and rules and regulations that impede efficiency of movement of transport.

I mention the placement of guardrails, which are there from a safety aspect but which are put so close to a road that traffic users cannot get off the road in times of crisis, like a flat tyre. So now their vehicle is stranded on the side of the road on the edge or inside the lane of transport because the guardrails will not let them get off. That is another piece of infrastructure that adds to cost and adds to the issue of safety.

Then there is the cost of guardrails and perhaps the cost of the stoplights, which the member for Narungga has seen impede his traffic flow up towards Narungga. It is more cost, an additional cost that could have gone into something even better, like repairing our roads and fixing the potholes that we are finding in our roads, in today's infrastructure that is falling apart in what was probably a mild early winter, a wet late winter and now has turned out to be a very, very wet spring.

I do not know whether anyone has travelled on regional roads lately, but my understanding is that the potholes are extending all the way from Mount Gambier right through to Ceduna. I do not know where maintenance sits on this, but I think the workers are flat out. The expenditure is huge for those maintaining these roads, but it tells you that the roads are tired, they are old and they need replacing. Again, why does this come up as a topic? Because it is about the priority of expenses and it is about the priority of expenditure on our roads. I think we must make sure that we keep our traffic flowing and that these roads can be navigated carefully and safely.

Coming back to speed restrictions and so forth and one of the things that we also hear about when we do up our roads, we put shoulders on roads and lifted the speed limit on eight roads under the Marshall government. A lot of these roads needed shoulders to be put in place. The shoulders have been done. Prior to these shoulders being in place, the speed limit was 100 km/h.

I am hoping that this new Malinauskas government does not revert to those sorts of tactics by reducing speed limits when the roads become that bad. I hope that they will find the means, the financial ability, to finance these roads back to the state they find them in now at 110 km/h and we do not have to see any more reductions. Why do I bring up these reductions? Because it is all about the speed and efficiency of transport around our regions. As has been highlighted by the member for Narungga, we want efficient, flowing transport to get where we need to be on a regular basis right across this state's network.

Coming back to the shoulders and how they were added to these roads, they have been added to more than just the eight. No doubt, there are others. Certainly, in MacKillop we have roads that need greater shoulder work. First of all, when the shoulders are done, we see the impediment of speed restrictions because the work needs to be carried out. The restrictions are then left in place because we need to see the new surface harden and wear in in a slower fashion than at the normal speed limit that could be applied to these roads. It will be 80 km/h for a number of months after the repairs have been done.

That may be all well intended to look after that new surface, but it impedes the flow of traffic. It frustrates motorists having to do 80 km/h for 10, 20 or 30 kilometres in some places. Again, we as local members got letters from frustrated motorists that road repairs took a long time to carry out and were over huge expanses because of the backlog and the massive upgrades that took place over the last four years of the Marshall government. I am hoping these repairs continue on through the Malinauskas Labor government.

Feedback about these shoulders is now that the new shoulders being added to the old road surfaces are causing another problem, and that is that the old road surfaces are of such an age that the new shoulders are not gelling and mixing as well as they could. What we have done is extended the width of the road. We now find that the left-hand sides of vehicles and heavy transport vehicles are driving down this join line, and the joins are fracturing, breaking, cracking up and creating more potholes than ever before. It is the legacy of old surfaces needing a new shoulder.

These potholes cause hazards. They need to be repaired regularly. I know that the maintenance crews, for example the Fulton Hogan business, are stretched. It stretches their means. In our region of the Limestone Coast, we have seen Victorian crews come into South Australia to try to back up our South Australian crews because they cannot keep up with this maintenance.

In the gist of transport and efficiencies, I am all for spending money on it, making sure it is effective and making sure it works. I do not like seeing these impediments in our transport network that slow us down, make it harder and are an extra burden to business. Another thing that has come to my mind is that the Marshall government had these ideas of creating a bypass around Adelaide and a northern entrance into Adelaide for heavy transport. It comes back to this point about Narungga with stoplights heading north of Adelaide and the impediments that these sorts of stoppages cause for heavy transport.

It was well noted by the heavy transport industry that, if they can come from Melbourne or the Limestone Coast and avoid the city, avoiding all the stoplights, not only would they really appreciate a bypass that would go out past Monarto and onto the Sturt Highway entrance from the Riverland into Adelaide but they would actually be happy to pay a toll to bypass Adelaide and get onto a freeway that would take them around it. It is because of the cost of being bottlenecked up in peak-hour traffic in Adelaide, the stoplights and the stop-starting.

People need to recognise that we are talking about motions of energy, trucks 40 to 60 tonnes stopping and starting, and paying a truck driver I imagine anything from $20, $30, $40 or $50 an hour to sit in a truck and perhaps waste time compared to other alternatives. These sorts of issues have been highlighted here in the north of Adelaide when we think about the Northern Expressway, the north-south corridor and free-flowing traffic. We do not want to see this state impeded by infrastructure that just gets in the way.

I hope those on the other side—they are new in this new Malinauskas government—recognise that, yes, safety is a concern but it needs to be balanced with efficiency. In solving what the member for Narungga has raised here, I hope that common sense prevails. I fully support all those who have spoken in support of this motion. I congratulate the member for Narungga on his motion and I wish him all the best.

Ms HOOD (Adelaide) (12:35): I move amendments to the motion as follows:

Delete (c)

Within (d):

Delete the word 'immediate'

Delete the words 'reverse this short-sighted decision and'

With those amendments, I would just like to make some brief comments. There is a developer deed between the Riverlea developers and this state. This sets out what road improvements will be done, whose financial responsibility they are and the implementation triggers. Traffic modifications under the developer deed include traffic light installation, which is complete and which was the developer's responsibility. The next step is further intersection improvements. The trigger has not yet been met, which again is the developer's responsibility.

In relation to an overpass and signal removal on Port Wakefield Road, current traffic volumes do not justify a grade-separated solution. This is a very expensive solution; however, I am advised that it is something the state government will be looking at and, as a result, will be closely monitoring traffic volumes. I appreciate that this may not be the response the member wants to hear, but the member for Narungga would recognise it is very difficult to try to fix all the problems we have inherited from the previous Marshall Liberal government.

I do want to thank the member for Narungga for bringing this motion to the house, and I know the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport encourages him to keep up that advocacy through local and federal members of parliament as well because this is an issue that is important for our freight industry and the local community. I once again acknowledge the member for Narungga's advocacy on behalf of his electorate.

Mr ELLIS (Narungga) (12:37): I thank all members for their contributions to the debate—another lengthy one but, as has been articulated by a number of speakers, an important one for a great many people who live in our wonderful state.

I will respectfully offer that I do intend to oppose the amendments put forward by the government, well intentioned as they may be. The basis for that is that, with regard to the deletion of paragraph (c), that was an attempt by me to acknowledge the wonderful work done not only by the Labor government but by our previous Liberal government.

The Northern Connector, as I articulated previously, is a wonderful addition to our road network and has had a tremendous benefit for the people of Yorke Peninsula in accessing metropolitan services in a far quicker time, just like the development at Port Wakefield currently being undertaken is having a similar impact on travel times as well.

The intent behind acknowledging the good work of successive governments is perhaps also to highlight the inconsistency of government action. It is very difficult for my constituents to understand why at Port Wakefield we will be installing an overpass to improve traffic flow and at Buckland Park putting up stoplights. You cannot reconcile those two things. They are not too far apart in distance, but they are two completely different solutions. It is hard for my constituents and I to understand the rationale behind those things.

While there has been some excellent work done by successive governments, the point of that particular part of the motion was to highlight the inconsistency and try to bring attention to the fact that there should be similar works done at Buckland Park as are being done on other parts of our road network.

The other important part would be that the government proposes to delete the immediacy of this motion, and that is another part that I strongly object to. My constituents, and the constituents north of Adelaide, should not be forced to wait until 9,000 blocks may or may not get sold at Buckland Park to see an improvement in their road network. We object to the inconvenience that has been placed upon us. We would like to see that solution solved sooner rather than later and, as such, oppose the effort to remove the immediacy from the motion.

However, if this house does see fit to remove those parts of the motion, then hopefully the minister—and I have been liaising with him directly—will make those improvements that I mentioned in my opening speech to the warning lights. I recall as a younger person coming to Adelaide and having lights that operated in that very fashion at Waterloo Corner, so if I remember correctly I think there is precedent within South Australia for those lights. I am hoping that we can come up with a commonsense outcome, even in the event that I cannot convince the majority of the benefits of immediate action, which will improve the safety at that intersection in the immediate term.

With the greatest of respect to the government, I will be opposing their amendments. I do thank all the members for their contributions on the motion. It is wonderful to see another well-represented motion on an issue that is of significant importance to my electorate.

The house divided on the amendments:

Ayes 25

Noes 17

Majority 8

AYES

Andrews, S.E. Bettison, Z.L. Bignell, L.W.K.
Boyer, B.I. Brown, M.E. Champion, N.D.
Clancy, N.P. Close, S.E. Cook, N.F.
Fulbrook, J.P. Hildyard, K.A. Hood, L.P.
Hughes, E.J. Hutchesson, C.L. Malinauskas, P.B.
Michaels, A. Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. (teller)
Pearce, R.K. Piccolo, A. Picton, C.J.
Savvas, O.M. Stinson, J.M. Thompson, E.L.
Wortley, D.J.

NOES

Basham, D.K.B. Batty, J.A. Bell, T.S.
Brock, G.G. Cowdrey, M.J. Ellis, F.J. (teller)
Gardner, J.A.W. Hurn, A.M. McBride, P.N.
Pederick, A.S. Pisoni, D.G. Pratt, P.K.
Speirs, D.J. Tarzia, V.A. Teague, J.B.
Telfer, S.J. Whetstone, T.J.

PAIRS

Szakacs, J.K. Patterson, S.J.R. Koutsantonis, A.
Marshall, S.S.

Amendments carried; motion as amended carried.

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