HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-10-28 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Statutes Amendment (Planning, Infrastructure and Other Matters) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 October 2025.)

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (12:09): I rise to indicate that I am the opposition's lead speaker on the bill, and I will indicate that the opposition is not opposing the bill in this place and wants to see the bill move to the council in an orderly way—that is, in circumstances where we hear it.

This is No. 13 in Government Business on the Notice Paper. We are at the end of 2025. The minister, in introducing the bill, rightly indicated that last year the Malinauskas Labor government had laid out a road map towards its stab at addressing the ongoing housing crisis in this state, and the government tells us that this omnibus bill contains a variety of the ingredients that are necessary to do so.

The question that South Australians would be well entitled to ask is, 'Well, that was mapped out sometime last year'—I am not sure exactly when, but around the early or middle part of the year; and we have had this housing crisis ongoing now for a long period of time—'and yet here we are bringing forward a lately introduced omnibus bill with a variety of ingredients that the government tells us are necessary to address the crisis.'

The reason why the opposition is going to make sure that this bill can proceed with maximum efficiency, the opportunity having arisen just now, is that we are right now in circumstances where not only has it taken a while to arrive but, so far as I am aware and understand, we have leading industry participants who, like the opposition, are wanting to be supportive of these measures. But in the diligent, thoroughgoing way that they are engaged in consideration of reform, they are left having to continue to work through their views about what is a range of reforms—and there are 85 clauses or so—affecting several acts, and we are not yet receiving from industry a concluded view.

There are several flagged areas of interest/concern. Sufficiently, we have the example of the UDIA indicating that it has advised the government that it wants some further time before indicating a concluded view. As I understand it, the HIA and the MBA of SA are in a similar boat. So here we are in this place, the minister has identified the government's objectives by this, and the opposition is in a similar situation to industry and has certainly flagged the likelihood at one level of the key concerns, such as they are, being aired at the appropriate time in the council and, to the extent that it may be necessary, working to address any matters of substance that remain a cause for concern following that process.

I think it sounds not unreasonable that industry has given its feedback. In the course of my time, I have valued enormously the contribution from each of those bodies that I have identified, among others, in usefully contributing to the process. My colleague the shadow minister in another place is actively engaged with assisting in that process. Therefore, I trust and expect that, by the time the bill makes its way to another place, there will be that opportunity. I hope by then the government has been able to secure a more concluded view than what has been practical in all the circumstances that the bill has found its way here. So, let us deal with it in the house promptly and in due course with that opportunity, as I have flagged, address matters that may be outstanding in another place.

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION (Taylor—Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Housing Infrastructure, Minister for Planning) (12:15): I thank the deputy leader for his contribution. The government has made great strides since the Housing Roadmap, with this bill directly originating from that process. Concordia is probably the most sort of graphic example of this, Deputy Speaker, and it is adjacent to your electorate. It has been on the drawing board since 2010—15 long years—more than a decade went past from it being identified.

This government included it in its land release and included it in its road map. The code amendment is now done, 10,000 or so properties, with an associated infrastructure scheme to manage all of the costs of infrastructure which are substantive. The fundamentals of this bill are—and industry will like this—the use of technology and AI to make planning decisions quicker so they can be made in minutes instead of weeks and, most importantly—and this is a sort of terribly boring reform in one sense—a dramatic productivity improvement for the housing sector: the enablement of electronic dealings in property and land division which could save up to three months.

So, with respect, the UDIA, the MBA, the HIA, all my favourite friends in the industry, should be falling all over themselves to get the opposition to help us pass this bill. Of course, I suspect the deputy leader's outline of their misgivings is that there are elements of this bill around infrastructure schemes, around requiring a property owner's consent to put in a planning application, which I regard as a sort of basic property right, and one that came up when the Deputy Speaker hosted, at least in part, the government's community cabinet in Two Wells. This exact issue came up of a property owner who had a planning application put in on their property without their consent.

It would seem to me a fundamental property right that you at least get asked for your agreement if someone is putting in a planning application on your property. So there are a range of small issues in this bill that are attached to the bigger reform, and those small issues do need to be resolved for the good order of the industry and the state. We are happy to work with the opposition, of course, on that, but we do need to listen to industry. It is important that we do so, but we also have to balance their submissions with what I think would be best described as common sense and the public interest. With those words, I will conclude.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 to 39 passed.

Clause 40.

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION: I move:

Amendment No 1 [HousingUrbDev–1]—

Page 15, after line 14—Before subclause (1) insert:

(a1) Section 163(1) and (2)—delete 'this Subdivision' wherever occurring and substitute in each case:

this section

Basically this just cleans up some technical issues. Some provisions of the State Development Coordination and Facilitation Act 2025 commenced on 7 October 2025. Those provisions inserted a new section relating to primary infrastructure schemes into subdivision 2 of division 1, part 13, of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016.

That means there are now two sections of subdivision 2, one relating to basic infrastructure schemes and one relating to primary infrastructure schemes. The amendment alters the wording of the section relating to basic infrastructure schemes by amending references to 'a scheme under this subdivision' to 'a scheme under this section'. It is entirely an amendment to resolve some drafting errors.

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Remaining clauses (41 to 85) and title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION (Taylor—Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Housing Infrastructure, Minister for Planning) (12:21): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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