HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-12-01 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Question Time

PORT ADELAIDE PRECINCT

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:26): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Industrial Relations and for State/Local Government Relations a question about apparent contradictions concerning statements about events in the old and recent past.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: We have a history in this state in which certain districts or suburbs played a greater role than others. Among the former is Port Adelaide, rich in terms of heritage but now poor in terms of economic activity. Three weeks ago the Premier called a halt to—in fact, he cancelled—a major development at Port Adelaide. He said:

We think we can do a whole lot better down there. There's a whole lot of old buildings, beautiful buildings like the old Customs House that are just covered in pigeon poo and just sort of sitting there. But they could be magnificent. And so that's why we're taking it back in to revitalise it.

The Premier's statement gave some hope, even confidence, that the government was onside when it came to refurbishing and reconditioning what is left of Port Adelaide's historic buildings, and getting rid of the pigeon poo as well.

In February the Port Adelaide Enfield council began lobbying the government to introduce legislation specifically aimed at properties in the port's heritage precinct. The laws would have forced property owners to spruce up heritage buildings which had fallen into disrepair and become derelict. However, this week the local government minister, the Hon. Mr Wortley, rejected the council proposal. Instead he wants all ratepayers at Port Adelaide Enfield to subsidise property owners to do their work through rate rebates and increased heritage grants.

My question is: can the minister explain this backflip regarding Mr Weatherill's commitment to the Port Adelaide precinct and the minister's decision to kibosh the council-endorsed proposal?

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (14:28): I thank the honourable member for his question. The Port Adelaide Enfield council wrote to the previous minister in May 2011 about a council resolution to approach the state government in relation to the provision of suitable legislation to allow the council to clean up the historic port township precinct. I wrote to the council and advised that the Local Government Act 1999 contained powers for councils to issue orders with regard to unsightly conditions of land and buildings and, in the event of noncompliance, councils may take action and recover costs.

I also advised the council that there was a range of approaches that could be pursued with regard to this issue, including looking at provisions prescribed in the Heritage Places Act 1993 which relate to the protection of heritage places. Additionally, the council could provide financial incentives to assist property owners with the cost of maintenance and the clean-up of buildings. I understand the Port Adelaide Enfield council has a heritage grant scheme which assists with work to maintain places of local heritage significance.

I am open to working with the Port Adelaide Enfield council on this matter, and it is possible that council may be able to adopt options and strategies that are already available. I have also suggested to the Port Adelaide Enfield council that it may wish to consult with other councils about their experiences and views on this matter. If, as a result, councils wish to present a submission, based on information from across the sector, including experience with current legislative and other options, then I am more than prepared to consider this.

I would like to again thank the honourable member for his question, but it is quite obvious that the people of Port Adelaide are not at the forefront of the question or the concern of the honourable member. We all know that there is going to be a by-election very shortly and the mayor will be a candidate, so it is in the interests of the Liberal Party to be pushing the candidacy of the mayor, Gary Johanson. It is a shame that this leader—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway: Ridiculous. That's outrageous stuff.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY: It's outrageous, that's right. It is a shame that the leader cannot actually pick up an issue that he actually has some commitment and passion for, instead of having every issue as a part of the political tactic.

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Ms Lensink has a supplementary.

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