HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-07-24 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

ASPEN GROUP

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (14:58): I seek leave to make an explanation before asking the Leader of the Government a question about the Aspen Group development.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: Reported on 12 July this year was the following statement in respect of the minister:

Minister for Urban Development and Planning Paul Holloway today described as intolerable the Adelaide City Council's rejection of the Aspen Group's proposed office tower in Franklin Street. Mr Holloway says he is urgently formulating a response to take to Cabinet next week to ensure that the development assessment process in the Adelaide CBD is no longer blatantly politicised. 'The position adopted by the Adelaide City Council's Development Assessment Panel flies in the face of the planning reforms initiated by this government,' Mr Holloway says.

Just two days after that, on the Monday, but reported on the Tuesday in The Advertiser of 15 July, was this statement:

Adelaide City Council has been stripped of planning powers for projects costing more than $10 million, unlocking an expected surge of city development.

A press statement dated 14 July under the heading of Mike Rann, entitled 'Government restores independence to city planning', which was actually a press statement by infrastructure minister Patrick Conlon, stated:

Infrastructure minister Patrick Conlon today announced any application for a development project within the Adelaide City Council area that exceeds $10 million will now be assessed by the independent Development Assessment Commission.

Further on in his statement minister Conlon said:

State cabinet's decision this morning, which is to be achieved through a regulatory change to be gazetted this week, is entirely consistent with the recommendations on State Significant Development made by the recently published Planning Review.

When doing media interviews, minister Conlon, who was handling this issue at that stage, said:

However, Mr Conlon said the council's decision had not influenced yesterday's announcement—

that is, the announcement made by cabinet—

This proposal has been around for a long time, although you have to think about what has happened in recent times.

I contrast Mr Conlon, claiming on the Monday that cabinet's decision had not been influenced at all by the city council's rejection of the Aspen Group's development, with minister Holloway stating on Friday that it was intolerable and he was going to take a submission to cabinet on the Monday to sort this particular issue out. My questions are:

1. Did minister Holloway receive any legal advice or planning advice that warned him against indicating that cabinet was going to change policy in this area to impact on a specific development, that is, the Aspen development?

2. Why did minister Conlon announce the cabinet decision on the Monday, rather than minister Holloway, who has responsibility in the area and who had indicated that he was going to take the submission to cabinet?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:01): In relation to the second question, it is quite simple. I took the submission to cabinet but I left at about lunch time that day to go over to the ministerial council, which was a follow-up meeting. As the Minister for Police, I was South Australia's representative in relation to alcohol abuse. Minister Conlon was familiar with the development—as I have indicated earlier in relation to a virtually identical question that the former leader asked me several days ago—because the Office of Infrastructure was responsible for the early promotion, if I can use that word, of the particular redevelopment proposal for the post office square. Minister Conlon provided the answer: simply because I was not available to do it, as I was on a plane. Relating to the first part of the question, I am not really sure what the answer is. Certainly, I have not sought any specific legal advice in relation to—

The Hon. R.I. Lucas: No; generally.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: In relation to what? The Hon. Rob Lucas asks all these questions about specifics; they are a sort of entanglement—

The Hon. R.I. Lucas: Because I know what is happening.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Well, he does not know what happened; he is fishing. If the Hon. Rob Lucas wishes to ask me a specific question I will answer it, but I am not going to respond to this sort of innuendo. I know what he is like. I have been in this place long enough to know the sorts of questions that the Hon. Rob Lucas asks. If he asked me a straightforward question, he would get a straightforward answer.

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