HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-04-08 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY

The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN (14:56): My question is to the Leader of the Government, the Minister for Urban Development and Planning. Will the minister outline the work that is underway to properly identify land for new homes within the urban boundary and townships outside the metropolitan area as part of a strategic approach to planning for our growing population? Is the minister aware of any alternative views?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (14:57): I thank the honourable member for his questions. To ensure that we plan for enough housing this government is investigating possible growth areas in the Greater Adelaide region as part of a 30 year plan. This investigation includes the availability of land in the metropolitan area as well as in townships on the outer fringe.

South Australia has a growing population, so it is important to maintain land supply to prevent this growth pushing up prices and reducing home affordability. Without an increased population, South Australia will not maintain the pace of economic growth required to support our current enviable lifestyle and our ageing population.

The need to support our housing and construction sector and its supporting industries has taken on even greater importance in the face of meeting the challenges created by the global financial crisis. The federal and state governments are working together to deliver a multi-million dollar economic stimulus package for this state which will, hopefully, limit job losses and reduce the downside to the South Australian economy from the worldwide downturn that is currently being experienced in the wake of the collapse of the Lehman Brothers investment bank.

To support the housing industry the government needs to identify areas that can provide a suitable supply of land. While we have included more than 2,000 hectares of new land suitable for residential development in the urban growth boundary, this government is committed to identifying a 25 year rolling supply to meet the demands of a growing population and changes to the traditional family unit. This means looking beyond the urban growth boundary.

One of the areas already in demand as an attractive place to live that is close to the metropolitan area is Mount Barker. As part of the planning strategy adopted by this government consultants are investigating its projected optimum size and growth for the next three decades. This government is also working closely with local government on draft proposals for Mount Barker, and will make any proposals available for public consultation later this year.

The need to protect agricultural land for production is most certainly being taken into account when investigating potential growth areas. One of the central reasons for identifying growth areas and planning for growth during the next 30 years is to allow the government to plan well in advance for infrastructure investment, transport needs, schools and public works. It also allows the government—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: You do not put infrastructure there until you actually start building; it is actually a greenfield site. What you have to do is plan for it, and that is exactly what this government is doing with one of those sites in Buckland Park, and infrastructure will be looked at as part of the 30 year plan. It also allows the government to require developers to share in the cost of this improved infrastructure as part of any proposed redevelopment or development, as the case might be.

The honourable member asked whether I was aware of any alternative views regarding the imperative to plan for growth, and indeed I am. In fact, I was most concerned the other morning when I opened up The Courier newspaper to see the headline, 'Liberals say no more growth'. Below that headline, the article quotes from the member for Kavel, who I think is a shadow minister in the other—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: He's not?

An honourable member: No.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Well, it's probably not surprising.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Just a backbencher. Below that headline, the article quotes the local member outlining his opposition to any new homes in the Hills. In the newspaper article, he is quoted as saying:

Our position is that we don't allow any further rezoning of residential land, or any new land, to be opened up for residential purposes.

So, there we have it: the Liberal Party has run up the white flag on development. Earlier today, we had the Leader of the Opposition raising concerns about a port going ahead in Port Lincoln.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Indeed; they seem to be anti any sort of development whatsoever, other than a stadium—and they seem to be addicted to that. If you want to build residential housing, including affordable housing, it seems that, wherever you go around the Adelaide area, the Liberals will be playing politics with it. So, there we have it: the Liberals have run up the white flag, and 'Not in my backyard' seems to be the new Liberal creed.

This government supports economic growth and the jobs it creates and maintains. If we do not have reasonable growth, particularly with the ageing population and the economic crisis, we will be in for declining living standards—and that might be what members opposite want to achieve, but it is certainly not what this government wants. We want South Australians to have the opportunity to work and earn an income and to be able to raise their families in a prosperous economy. We do not want to dictate to them about where they should and should not live. Instead, this government is committed to using the planning strategy to ensure that South Australians can make the choice of where they want to call home by providing choice and affordability in an economical and sustainable way.

We appreciate that Adelaide is landlocked between the gulf to the west and the hills face zone to the east, and that is why there is enormous pressure to develop land to the north and south. We are also in the process of rolling out planning reforms that will encourage greater urban infill to ease the pressure to release new greenfield sites. So, it is all part of our comprehensive plan.

This government is also carrying out the hard work needed to identify suitable land outside the metropolitan area—and, indeed, that is the function of the Greater Adelaide Plan. What we will not do is allow this state to stagnate or to burst at the seams because we have decided that some areas should be 'no go' zones or that we should be driving people further out of the city because of the lack of affordable housing.

Certainly, some members of the Liberal opposition have said that they do not want to be part of the 30 year plan for Greater Adelaide, and I think it is sad that the Liberals have again failed to embrace an opportunity to adopt a long-term vision for this state. It appears that that is being sacrificed at the very first opportunity on the alter of narrow self-interest.

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