HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-05-12 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

MINDA INCORPORATED

The Hon. M. PARNELL (14:57): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question about the Minda dunes.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: A draft master plan developed for Minda's Brighton campus, which includes 144 commercial beachside apartments, has been released by Minda Incorporated. The Brighton retirement apartments, in a five storey block, are included in a $200 million plan that also features 69 retirement villas.

This development is proposed to be located on top of the last remaining privately owned remnant dune system along the Adelaide metropolitan coastline, a system that contains species of conservation significance, including species and plant communities found nowhere else on the metropolitan coast.

Although the front or forward sand dunes on the Minda land are protected from development, the secondary dunes, which contain the highest diversity of significant flora (some eight species) and are in the most intact state, are not protected.

Over a decade of community effort, including conservation groups, Minda volunteers, scientists and the state and local government, has been put into the site's protection, and local, state and national funding has been invested in the site for planning and onground works.

Should development proceed in the secondary dunes, the City of Holdfast Bay suggests that seven plants of conservation significance would essentially become locally extinct within the Minda sand dunes and two would become regionally extinct on the Adelaide metropolitan coastline.

In Saturday's Advertiser, Tim Lloyd suggested that a lack of government funding has forced Minda Incorporated to propose this aggressive development to provide an income stream of $5 million per year. Tim Lloyd said:

By short-changing these institutions, and failing to fix their outmoded accommodation, they have turned executives who should be focused on the care of their clients into property developers selling off the farm in a desperate search for capital and income.

At a public meeting on Thursday 22 April, the Deputy CEO of Minda Incorporated, Robert Cairney, said that Minda had been in discussions with minister Holloway on the future of the master plan. I also note that, according to Daniel Wills in The Advertiser last week, a spokesperson for the minister said that no formal request for major project status had yet been lodged. My questions are:

1. What has been the nature of the minister's discussions with Minda Incorporated over the Minda dunes site?

2. Does the minister rule out the granting of major development status for this housing development if the City of Holdfast Bay refuses approval?

3. What guarantees can the minister give that his government will ensure that the remnant secondary dune area will be protected?

4. If the government does not allow Minda to proceed with its proposed master plan, how will the government assist in raising the $5 million per year that Minda hopes to receive through the development?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:00): May I just say that the honourable member referred to an article by Tim Lloyd, which I thought was a very dishonest and unprofessional article. To try to blame the state government for what is being proposed at Minda Home is quite outrageously dishonest—and let me put that on the record. We do not expect an awful lot from Advertiser journalists at times, but that was really quite over the top. In relation to the—

The Hon. R.I. Lucas: We see the arrogance has gone.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: What is arrogant is that members opposite–

The Hon. R.I. Lucas: On the third sitting day—the arrogance of this government.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: In other words, journalists can tell outright lies in the newspapers and, of course, Mr Lucas will agree with them because he is in league with half of them. In fact, I am sure when we have a more appropriate occasion (and I am looking forward to the Address in Reply when some of the nonsense that has been spoken about the recent election can be addressed) some balance can be put into that debate. Since the question was about Minda—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: We know that members opposite do not want to hear the truth. Again, the real arrogance in this parliament is from Liberals who continually try to prevent the truth being told. It will be told in relation to this particular article. If we use the next 17 minutes of question time by them interrupting, so be it.

When I first became the Minister for Urban Development and Planning some five years ago, I soon became aware that Minda was looking at the future plans for its area. As a result of that, in 2006, at my instigation, the North Brighton Coastal Plan Amendment Report was introduced to guide any future development of the North Brighton site.

Specifically, that plan amendment report considered public access along the foreshore, the provision of appropriate linkages through the site, the protection and enhancement of significant coastal environs, the interface between adjoining land uses. As a result, changes to the development plan included a realignment of the coastal conservation zone boundary to increase the area of land protected by the zone from 1.8 hectares to 3.3 hectares and to ensure adequate protection of the remnant dune system, or certainly the frontal dune system.

On 31 March this year, Minda released a draft master plan for public consultation. As a matter of courtesy, Minda informed me that they were doing that and showed me the plans. That was the total of my involvement to date: to meet with them and be informed about what they were proposing to do. At this stage Minda have released their plan. It was out for public consultation and Minda are responsible for that master plan. As I understand it they are still getting feedback. That explains why, when my office was asked about it, there was no formal proposal and nor has the government indicated in any way that it would look favourably at it or make any other comment about it.

At this stage it is simply a master plan that Minda have put out for the future of their site at North Brighton. It is up to them as to what happens. They are getting public feedback. When they are ready, I guess they will release what they plan to do and take action from there. I am not going to make any hypothetical decisions on what may or may not be a final proposal. Why else would Minda be putting out their draft master plan for public consultation if they were not going to respond to it?

I know my colleague, the local member for the area (the member for Bright), has put on public record her views in relation to it. I am sure others in the community will share the view. It is up to Minda to respond to the public response to their proposal. I have not made any comment on it. As I said, I have simply met with people from Minda to become informed of their proposals.

This government took action in 2006. It was one of the things I did early on as Minister for Urban Development and Planning to ensure that the sand dunes at Minda, at least the frontal dunes, were properly protected. I have not actually seen the area in question, and I do not propose to see it until it becomes of any relevance to any proposal that may be put forward. The action that I took back in 2006 was to ensure that should Minda proceed with any development plan, which even in those days (four or five years ago) they were talking about doing, there would be some protection for the dunes.

At this stage, it is up to Minda as to what they intend to do and to put their proposals there. I can understand why Minda would be looking at ways of ensuring that its site is viable. Clearly, much of the infrastructure on the North Brighton site is fairly old now; a lot of it was constructed 50 years ago or thereabouts. Some of it is heritage listed; some of it is not. Clearly, Minda are trying to do their best for the people who depend on their services, and they are also consulting with the community.

To suggest that in some way the government has been trying to influence this process, as the journalist in The Advertiser did, is, I think, quite outrageous. The honourable members opposite might think it is arrogant to defend that but, if it is arrogance to sit here and take criticism that is false and just accept it, that will not happen. I do not believe it is arrogant to defend the position of the government, and we will strongly defend it against false accusations.

This proposal is entirely one that Minda have put forward. They have told me that they will be seeking public consultation. I certainly made the comment to Minda in relation to this particular proposal that I expected that there would be a number of issues associated with it, but it is up to them as to how they respond. In doing that, I think all of us would support the work that Minda does in protecting intellectually disabled people. I think the community has a great deal of sympathy for Minda and the work that it does but, clearly, there are other planning issues that will need to be addressed. I will await the result of Minda's public consultation process before I make any further comment on the validity or otherwise of what it is proposing.

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