HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-06-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

MARBLE HILL

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK (15:20): I have a further supplementary question. In determining the future of Marble Hill, did the minister and her department consider retention of Marble Hill as an authentic heritage ruin, as compared to complete restoration; and, if it was considered, why was maintaining it as a ruin not considered?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse, Minister Assisting the Minister for Health) (15:22): The government did not have a dedicated or prescribed view of the future for that particular site. We were aware that it had lain in ruin for many years—50 years or so—and that it was in a very poor state and had been continually deteriorating over the years. We were also aware that the cost of even comprehensively maintaining the site was exorbitant, and we know that the site, as I said, over those 50 years has slowly deteriorated not only in terms of the elements but also through vandalism.

We went through a process of asking for expressions of interest from the general public and opening the door to any ideas, views and initiatives that the public might have for the future of that site. We put quite limited caveats on that expression of interest. I cannot remember all of them, but it included maintaining the integrity of the heritage values of the site and, I think, public access as well. As I said, I cannot remember the details of those caveats but there were a couple of quite general ones.

So we threw that open to the public and were prepared to consider a wide range of views from partnerships or any ideas that anyone was prepared to put forward. We were prepared at least to look at them. Although a number of people took away documents of expression of interest, we received only one application in terms of the expression of interest, and that is the one before us.

It was a proposition that more than met our aspirations. We were extremely pleased and delighted to have a response from two people committed to heritage restoration, and they have a strong track record in past initiatives and a deep public commitment and sense of public service to the South Australian community in terms of being prepared to invest huge amounts of money. These are very expensive operations and they are prepared to commit to that financially. As I said, the decision has not been finalised yet but we are hoping it will proceed to finalisation.

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