HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-06-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

CHARACTER PRESERVATION (BAROSSA VALLEY) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 May 2012.)

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (15:27): I rise to make some opening comments in relation to the Character Preservation (Barossa Valley) Bill 2012. It is interesting that the minister has just finished question time with her description of her tour of the Barossa with Jan Angas and other important people in the Barossa. I had a similar tour some months ago. I went to Apex Bakery and the noodle factory, drove past the Louise and also ended up at Hutton Vale where I did have a lunch and it was a very pleasant lunch.

It is interesting to look at these two bills, this one and the Character Preservation (McLaren Vale) Bill, and their history. Before the last election the Hon. Robert Brokenshire introduced a bill, which I think was called the Willunga Basin Protection Bill, which was similar in a broad sense in its intent to offer some level of protection for these areas against urban sprawl.

At the time the government voted against that piece of legislation. I indicated on behalf of the opposition that, while we did not think it was the perfect model, we were supporting it because we saw the intent and the sensibility of having something placed on the record that we recognise these areas as being important.

So, we look now at how these two pieces of legislation have come before us. We saw the issues at Seaford Rise where we had land that had been rezoned for some 30 years that the Liberal government had chosen not to put onto the market and to sell even through the darkest days of the State Bank disaster. The Liberal government of the day respected the wishes of the local community and saw that as land that was not suitable to be rezoned. But, no, this government in some of the best economic times this state has seen chose to put it on the market.

We saw the local outcry and the concerns raised by the local member, Mr Leon Bignell, the member for Mawson. It is quite interesting; the silence was deafening from Mr Bignell prior to the last election when this was being sold. It sold under an open tender in a very open and transparent process. The silence from Mr Bignell about this sale was deafening, but, of course, once the sale went through and it looked as though it would be developed, Mr Bignell suddenly found his voice.

Concerns were raised in the Mount Barker area, with a ministerial DPA imposed by minister Holloway and the final rezoning announced while he was on leave by the now Treasurer, the Hon. Jack Snelling. We have seen the outrage in the community there and more broadly answered by the now Minister for Urban Development and Planning—or Planning now because the government split Urban Development off to minister Conlon. The Hon. John Rau said that the government got it wrong in Mount Barker and that it would never happen again on his watch. That, I guess, is the forerunner to where we are today, where we see these two pieces of legislation.

I will not conclude my remarks today, but I do want to put a couple of comments on the record so that we can actually progress the debate while the Hon. Robert Brokenshire—who we all hope is making a speedy recovery from his recent health incident—is away. The Hon. Mr Brokenshire has a particular interest in this legislation, so I thought it only fitting that we do not complete it this week but wait until he is back in the chamber, and I know the minister was happy to facilitate that.

When we saw the initial bills tabled and the public discussion that ensued, we saw two particular areas zoned: the McLaren Vale area was outlined, which went right up to the back of the Adelaide Hills, and the Barossa Valley protection zone, which went all the way out and included the Mid Murray Council. Henschke's Hill of Grace winery was also covered in that particular area. Parliament, of course, was prorogued and when we saw the new bills that came back early this year, we saw two new areas. I think most people are quite relaxed about the area contained in the McLaren Vale protection zone because it is now limited to the Onkaparinga council.

As members would know, I live in Mitcham. The original map shows that, if I walk to the top of the hill in my street—close to the Hon. Robert Lawson's house—that would be in the McLaren Vale protection zone. So, I guess I could have walked to the top of the hill with a bottle of wine and had my own vines in Robert Lawson's backyard. So, really, it did not bear any real resemblance to the area I thought the government and the community were trying to identify. So that was changed.

We then saw the Barossa Valley protection zone changed to such an extent that the world's most famous single vineyard and winery—the winery that makes Henschke's Hill of Grace wine—was no longer in the protection zone. One of the reasons for having the protection zone was to enhance and protect our iconic tourism assets. I have visited that winery. I think they have been selling wine there for 150 years. In fact, because there was no accurate way to measure it, they would weigh the barrels, because they knew that wine at a certain alcoholic content would be a certain weight. That set of scales is still sitting at the door today. It just shows how old it is and why that particular winery should be part of any zone that wants to protect iconic parts of our tourism, food and wine and agricultural heritage.

I was a bit bemused as to why this had been taken out, so I asked the minister here some questions to pass on to minister Rau. His claim is that the Mid Murray Council said that it did not want to be involved. Interestingly, since then, the Barossa council has said that it does not want to be involved either. It is interesting that minister Rau is prepared to listen to the Mid Murray Council but is in fact quite offended that the Barossa council does not wish to be involved. So, there are some mixed messages coming out of the minister's office.

Of course, in the other chamber, minister Rau said that he had written to me and offered that, if I would like to re-include the Henschke's winery in the protection zone, he would be happy to accommodate it. It took close to three weeks before that letter was hand-delivered to my office. It was never posted or, if it was, it was lost or did not have a stamp on it, so I was a bit disappointed—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: When the minister's office comes and delivers and says 'Here, we finally got the copy to you,' you know it has not been lost or misplaced in my office. We never received it. We received an emailed, scanned copy. It is also interesting that the minister spoke on that Tuesday. On the Monday of that week I had a briefing with senior offices from planning and members of his staff and I asked about the Henschke's issue and they said, 'Well, you can do that in parliament if you like.'

There was not a mention such as, 'The minister's actually quite happy; he has written to you last week and posted it, you know. You should have received it.' There was no mention of that. I was intrigued as to exactly where the boundaries are going to be and also the town boundaries, and I will come to them shortly. If we look at the bill just quickly, it provides, under Part 3—Interpretation:

district means the area defined as the Barossa Valley district by the plan deposited in the General Registry Office at Adelaide and numbered GP 4 of 2012 (being the plan as it exists on the prescribed day) but does not include the areas marked as townships on the deposited plan;

The reason I say that is that we now have the minister saying, 'Yes, you can have it back in'—referring to Henschke's—and I will come to some other comments made by some other stakeholders in a moment.

I have suggested that it should be the Eden Valley Geographical Index (GI), which is a well-recognised geographical index for wine regions. It is determined by altitude—so many metres above sea level—and the geography. That is what I have suggested but, from opposition, of course we do not have the resources or the facility to draw accurate maps.

The minister says I can have it back in, and he has asked me in the letter to write to him, and I will do so, but I am also interested in some comments sent through yesterday from the Chairman of Food Barossa, I think Victoria Rezonja, in which she says:

In response to media coverage of the draft agricultural preserve bill, Linda Bowes, chairman of the Barossa Grape and Wine Association and myself met with minister Rau to clarify a few things. The minister was extremely generous with his time and answered all of our questions. Here are some of those questions and answers.

I will not go through all of them, but one of them is, 'Will the Eden Valley be included within the preserve boundaries?' The answer is yes. So, minister Rau has said to this group, 'Yes, it will be in.' Is it all of the Eden Valley? Is it just Henschke's winery? I think, before we debate this further, we should actually see the exact boundaries that the minister is talking about because, as I said, when this legislation passes, if it passes, whatever map we have will be deposited in the General Registry Office. If the boundaries are not accurate, parliament has to change the boundaries again.

We have to make sure that when we come back—when the Hon. Robert Brokenshire is back on deck and we debate this, probably on the next sitting day—we know exactly what the boundaries are. I know you will not permit me to hold up aerial photographs, Mr President, but I have two maps here: one is of the Beckwith Park facility and one is of the Tarac facility. I think it is called the North Para Environment Control Pty Ltd, which is a waste water treatment facility. The Beckwith Park facility is at Tanunda Road, Nuriootpa. There is a small area that is a bitumen car park and, for your benefit, just so you can see it, Mr President, it is that little red area there.

The PRESIDENT: I will mark that as Exhibit A.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: Exhibit A—that is in the agricultural preserve area, yet it is a bitumen car park, so it does not comply with anything that belongs in the agricultural preserve area. It should be inside the town boundary, but for some reason the boundaries were not adjusted on the map and so, in the maps lodged with the General Registry Office, that piece of land is in the agricultural preserve area as those maps exist today. I see the Hon. Gerry Kandelaars smiling in the background. He just told us a few moments ago how wonderful the Barossa was.

The Hon. G.A. Kandelaars: It is; it's true.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: And it is. If this government is serious about their intent, surely we should have accurate maps.

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins: Get their act together.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: As the Hon. John Dawkins says, 'Get their act together.' Equally, the North Para Environment Control facility, which has a number of hectares of wastewater treatment ponds, is in the agricultural preserve. So, no development will be allowed to enhance them, protect them and make the operation better because it is not a development that is allowed within the agricultural preserve under this particular piece of legislation as proposed by the government.

What I am asking the minister to do—this minister here—is to speak to minister Rau and, in the 10 days or so before we come back to complete the debate on these bills, actually check every township boundary and make sure that they are accurate and that the land that is to be in the town is in the town and that the land that is to be in the agricultural preserve is in the agricultural preserve. So, that is for every little town in the Barossa. Also, come back and clearly define the proposal for Eden Valley. Is it all of Eden Valley? Is it just to cover Henschke's? What are we talking about? Clearly, the minister has told the lady from the Barossa wine group, Victoria Rezonja, that it will be in, but we do not know what particular area we are talking about.

I have also had a number of discussions with the Barossa Council. The Barossa Council officers have had meetings and a task force was set up with the minister's office. The Barossa Council believe they have agreement on a range of amendments and that the minister is prepared to change the bill, yet we have not heard any discussion of that. I am not sure whether it is just the minister's staff saying that the minister is happy to do it and the minister is not, or whether there has been any agreement at all reached between the Barossa Council and the minister himself. At the very least, this chamber needs to see exactly what areas we are talking about and not maps that are inaccurate. We may well have to come back—

The Hon. Carmel Zollo: Perhaps the minister should give you a briefing.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: It is not a briefing. I have had a number of briefings. I have met with the minister's office. The Hon. Carmel Zollo says, 'Have a briefing.' I met with them. They did not tell me that he had written to me, yet he almost attacked me in the House of Assembly for not responding to his letter that I had never received. I think there is a big disconnect in the minister's office. When you see aerial photographs with areas that are bitumen car parks that are now in the protection zone, in the agricultural preserve, clearly they have it wrong.

It would not be that difficult, I would have thought, to go back and check the maps and make sure that the areas that they determine to be of agricultural importance are in the agricultural zone and that the areas that are to be towns are towns and not something else. It is a pretty simple thing to do.

So, it is not about me having briefings. It is up to the minister to stand by the maps and the information that he has provided. If it is not accurate, adjust it and make sure, in 10 days' time when we come back to debate this bill after estimates, that we have accurate information. With those few words, I seek leave to conclude my remarks, but do beg the minister to provide this chamber with accurate information before we continue the debate.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

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