HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2024-02-22 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 8 February 2024.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (12:14): I rise on behalf of the opposition in support of this amended amendment bill. It is wonderful to receive the amended version of this bill in this chamber, as it futureproofs the legislation against those who may try to change access conditions to our beloved Botanic Gardens. It amends the language and ensures that the public can enjoy the Adelaide Botanic Garden, the Mount Lofty Botanic Garden and the Wittunga Botanic Garden for free, along with free parking now and into the future.

The Adelaide Botanic Garden opened in 1857, and covers 50 hectares of stunning garden and heritage architecture. It is an apex of curated environmental significance and protected heritage. The Palm House is a personal favourite of mine; imported from Bremen, Germany, in 1875, and housing a collection of rare and endangered plants from the island of Madagascar.

The Wittunga Botanic Garden opened in 1975 and is loved by its community. The focus on native plants is wonderful, and it feels like you can see the entire state in only 13 hectares of compact and considered plantings.

Finally, the Mount Lofty Botanic Garden opened in 1977, our state's largest botanic garden, encompassing 97 hectares. This is a stunning garden. Established as a cool climate arboretum, it holds incredible views across the Mount Lofty Ranges and to metropolitan Adelaide, with a collection of plants to make interstate rivals green with envy.

We know in this place, as members of the Legislative Council, that words matter—in fact, we spoke about this the other day—and words in legislation matter. In this case, the protection of access to our favourite places such as the Botanic Gardens matters. I note a line in Hansard from the member for Waite regarding this bill, stating, 'The amendment bill before us was never intended to cause the issue it has.' Well, perhaps if the words of that legislation had been considered in full before being tabled it would not have caused such a debacle.

I refer to the second reading explanation of the responsible minister in the other place regarding the original wording of this bill. In that very short speech the minister herself pointed out the ability of this original legislation to introduce new paid parking on Sundays and public holidays. I quote: 'the option to introduce paid parking on Sundays and public holidays'. That is on the Hansard and is available online for all to read.

In that same speech, the minister also said that these changes were made in line with 'community expectations'. That was not the sentiment my team and I received when we sought feedback on this legislation in the community.

We are very pleased with the amendment. It is the right thing to do, and it is the right outcome. I am not sorry, though, that the government, particularly the minister in the other place, has felt uncomfortable at being called out for getting it wrong—indeed, that is why the opposition exists—and it is no surprise that the public was outraged by the implementation of this piece of legislation, which would allow for a picnic tax, a charge to visit the general gardens and permanent exhibits, especially when this government promised no new taxes.

To scream and shout in the other place that we are a party of liars is, in fact, the only lie in this entire debate. We pointed out the flaws in the government's legislation and they refused to amend it, so we simply shared the truth with the community. We simply shared that their legislation allowed for the ability to charge for entry, that their legislation allowed the ability to charge for car parking. That is true, is on the record from the minister herself. It was never a lie and it was never misinformation.

I would especially like to point out that it is undignified of a member of parliament, with their power and position, to accuse other people's staffers of being liars and scammers when they are, in fact, doing their job effectively. If you find it personally vexing that they are doing it so well then that is on you, not them. I would ask the government to leave staff out of political shouting matches.

The accusations that our party was attempting to 'tarnish the reputation of the beloved Adelaide Botanic Garden' could not be further from the truth. Any connection between the current board and the gardens is just that, a connection; they are not the gardens, and it is not necessarily this board that made us wary of the loophole in the previous iteration of this legislation.

As much as possible a bill should be written to exist in perpetuity. Make no mistake: if this bill had not been amended the original wording of this act would have allowed for the introduction of paid parking on Sundays and public holidays, and would have allowed the Botanic Gardens to charge entry fees at our gardens.

We believe, as does the current board of the Botanic Gardens, that this is not in the spirit and the intention of these public and much-beloved spaces. The simple truth is the decision and agreement of one board in the present does not stipulate the actions and decision-making of future boards. The only thing we were attempting to tarnish, to coin a phrase from the government, was the government's own reputation, which could have been avoided if the minister had paid attention to her own bill.

This was not about political pointscoring, but they are the ones who have dragged the Botanic Gardens board into this fray. It is not the board's responsibility to ensure the perpetuity of legislation, and it is not the board's responsibility to think of all the unintended consequences of poorly worded legislation. That is what they rely on their minister for.

Our job as an opposition is to hold that minister and her colleagues to account, to ensure there is no opportunity for a picnic tax, to share the truth with the community and to ensure that this error is and was corrected. The fact that the government amended their own bill to correct this error is an admittance of that sloppiness and a testament to the truth in the opposition's claims.

The gardens are for all. The Rhododendron Gully in the Mount Lofty Botanic Garden is in full bloom and is a sight to behold. The Magnolia Gully trail, I believe, outshines that of the national plantings in Canberra. We are pleased to support this version of the bill, ensuring that general admission to the Botanic Gardens will continue to be permanently free of charge, as has always been the case and should always be the case, for the people of South Australia and those who visit our beautiful gardens.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (12:21): I rise to speak on behalf of the Greens in support of the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2023. A summary of this bill is that it enables the board to address the issues of entering into a broader range of commercial arrangements, including commercial partnerships and joint ventures, as requested by the relevant board. It also has an option to introduce paid parking on Sundays and public holidays as a future possibility, in line with similar changes occurring across the City of Adelaide.

I note that, yet again, here we are in post-truth politics in this place, unfortunately. Again, I say to the Liberals: I know what you did last summer, which is that you lied about a picnic tax. Here we are yet again this week in parliament, debating what should be straightforward but which has caused undue consternation in the community.

The Greens do understand that our green space needs to be a priority, with services to our community. This bill is straightforward. There is no mention of a new so-called picnic tax, as the Liberals campaigned upon, for South Australians. It instead has done what the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium board has asked it to do: broadening their powers to engage in commercial activities that are in line with its broader purpose, simply bringing it into the 21st century.

There is a balancing act between commercial engagement and sponsoring community events, and this will allow them to attract more visitors to our much-loved gardens and allow us all to enjoy them in different ways. We have been so lucky to have a city located adjacent to stunning green spaces, where many of us do enjoy a picnic, a wedding or an event, such as the Fringe, Illuminate, Moonlight Cinema or WOMAD, where some of our most fascinating and stunning wildlife call home.

In November 2023, the Adelaide Botanic Gardens won a world accolade at the International Garden Tourism Awards as a garden of the world worth travelling for. Fortunately, for those of us in Adelaide we do not have to travel that far. We cannot also forget our other botanic gardens: Mount Lofty, dedicated to the cultivation of the world's cool climate plants; and Wittunga, a hidden oasis with an extensive collection of waterwise plants.

To ensure the board can continue to maintain these beautiful gardens and deliver these dynamic events that we all enjoy so much, their powers need to be updated and extended from what is currently in the act. This is a change that mirrors the powers of museums and art galleries, for example. It is not controversial, it should never have been controversial. The Liberal opposition made it controversial by engaging in a little more of what I am calling post-truth politics.

Bringing more people to experience our gardens and all they have to offer from all over the world is a change the Greens welcome and are very happy to support. We do bemoan that the debate has come to this. I draw the attention of members of the council and the community to two pieces of correspondence. One is dated 13 November 2023, and is addressed to the Hon. David Speirs MP, Leader of the Opposition. It comes from the Board of the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium and is signed off by Judy Potter, the Presiding Member of the Board of the Botanic Gardens, and cc'd to the relevant minister. The letter reads:

Dear Mr Speirs

On behalf of the Board of the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium, I am writing to you to express our disappointment at the 'No Picnic Tax' campaign you are prosecuting in South Australia in response to the proposed changes to the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium (BGSH) Act 1978.

A central tenet of this campaign is the incorrect claim that these changes to the Act will result in the introduction of general entry charges to the Adelaide Botanic Garden, the Mount Lofty Botanic Garden and the Wittunga Botanic Garden.

As I carefully explained to Mr Batty, and the staff from your office when we briefed them on the changes of our act on 28th September at your request, the Board has never had any intention to levy a general entry charge to the Botanic Gardens and has no intention of doing so in the future. Indeed, further amendments to the Act, which I am advised were filed in Parliament on October 18th, enshrine this stipulation into the Act.

No proposed changes to the Act reference general entry charging, with the exception of special sites and projects that have been subject to entry charges for many years, and across multiple governments. Given that we were very clear with your team on this, statements that there is a plan to introduce general entry charges across our sites, and the stress that this claim is causing our loyal visitors and our staff, are particularly disappointing. Your passion for the gardens is well understood to us and we would like to ensure you fully understand the Board's position and intentions.

Free daytime general entry to BGSH sites is a fundamental part of our ongoing success in serving the community of South Australia. Thanks to the hard work, innovation and creativity of the Gardens' staff in building on our core offer with special events and programs aimed at growing and diversifying our audience, we have seen significant growth in visitation over recent years, leading to a 6 year high of 1.3M visits to the Adelaide Botanic Garden in 2022/23.

Under your letter of direction as our Minister (17th September 2021), the Board was asked to pursue commercial opportunities to supplement our State Appropriation within the extent of our powers. We have found that the 1978 Act is limiting in what we can pursue and needs to be updated to be fit-for-purpose in 2023 and beyond. The fundamental objective of these changes is to give the Board the flexibility to pursue commercial opportunities consistent with our mission and purpose, and it is the responsibility of the Board and Minister of the day to ensure that these activities are in line with that purpose and with community standards.

Parking fees at our sites have long been part of our operation, and funds raised from these go directly to support the important horticultural, conservation and public engagement work of the BGSH. The modification of the 1978 Act's blanket ban on parking charges on Sunday were proposed to better enable the Board to manage parking demand at a time when parking charges apply across the City on Sundays. Again, I was clear with your office that there was no immediate plan to implement this, rather it was to give the Board the flexibility to respond to parking demand over the future life of the act.

Mr Speirs, the Board takes its responsibility to ensure that the BGSH serves its community very seriously. The Board and I would strenuously oppose any proposals to introduce general entry charging to the sites we manage and the suggestion that we are seeking to do so is a misrepresentation of the Board's position, and of the changes that have been proposed to the Act. On behalf of the Board, I ask you to correct the record on the suggestion that general entry charges are being introduced, or even contemplated, by the Board.

Noting we have not discussed this with you in person as you were not able to attend the briefing, I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter with you at your convenience.

Yours sincerely

Judy Potter

Presiding Member

This was followed up on 2 February 2024 with, again, a letter to the Hon. David Speirs, Leader of the Opposition, which reads:

Dear Mr Speirs

I refer to the Board's letter to you on 15th November 2023 regarding your campaign around entry and parking charges at the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium sites. It has come to our attention that, in spite of the Board clearly setting out the fact that this campaign is promulgating misinformation, there are still leaflets being handed out containing such misinformation and suggesting that general entry and parking charges are being planned for the Wittunga Botanic Garden. To be absolutely clear, there is no plan from either Board or Government to introduce any such charges at this garden. Any suggestion to the contrary is false.

I can also state that suggestions that we have seen in the media that either the Premier or the Deputy Premier have sought to have general entry charges introduced to any of our sites are also incorrect.

The Board is particularly concerned by the continuation of this campaign of misinformation, after I have both briefed your office on the actual intents of the Board, have written to you to formally correct the record, and have flagged the negative effect this is having on our community, visitors and staff.

I note that we have not received a response from you to our earlier letter. I remain available to meet with you to brief you directly in case you remain unclear on any aspect of the amendments to the BGSH Act.

Yours sincerely

Judy Potter

Presiding Member

Board of the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium

I seek leave to table these two documents, the letters of 15 November and 2 February, from the Board of the Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium presiding member to the Leader of the Opposition.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: It had not been my intention to read those letters out today. They were provided to me in the briefing. I share the concerns of the board about the lies and misinformation put out by the Liberal opposition with regard to this particular bill. It should not have been a controversial bill. Indeed, it was a bill initiated at the request of the Leader of the Opposition when he was minister. Politics is yet again being played in this place. The Greens support the bill. We look forward to its speedy passage and we hope that in the future, the Liberal Party will not continue to play post-truth politics with the people of South Australia.

The Hon. E.S. BOURKE (12:32): The Botanic Gardens of South Australia, like other cultural institutions, deserves the opportunity to avail itself of the choice to raise funds—for example, through special events and productions—so it may continue to deliver the existing and new services and events for which it is renowned and beloved by South Australians, visitors and many to our state. Quite importantly, such funds may also support the Botanic Gardens to continue to undertake and expand its important work of research and conservation.

The Botanic Gardens and State Herbarium Act will be amended to enable the board to raise funds where they are needed for such purposes. It is also important for the Botanic Gardens of South Australia to be able to raise these funds to maintain and improve the gardens and their assets in a sustainable and ongoing way. The changes proposed in this bill will, quite simply, assist the board to broaden their methods of raising money to support the work of the Botanic Gardens.

These amendments bring the Botanic Gardens in line with very similar acts, like the SA Museum and Art Gallery of South Australia acts, as well as acts under jurisdictions with very similar bodies. Currently, there is a specific list in the Botanic Gardens act of commercial activities that the Botanic Gardens may pursue and raise revenue from. Because this is a prescriptive list, it means that many commercial activities which are not listed are not open to broader consideration.

The amendments will mean that the list in the act will be replaced by general functions of allowing the Botanic Gardens to seek revenue from activities which support its work. In addition, the regulations limiting the days on which parking charges may be levied haven't been deleted, which will reduce flexibility to the board in deciding how and when car parking revenue may be raised. I am advised that the types of activities the Botanic Gardens might engage in, once these amendments are passed, include the development of new products for sale, licensing images from the beautiful collections or establishing new special access programs and services.

It is actually really exciting to think of the possibilities that are now open to the gardens to increase exposure and public awareness of these unique places, while also creating revenue to support their important conservation work that we see at our museums and also our art gallery in South Australia, which I hope everyone in this gallery would support.

Following the passage of this bill, the Botanic Gardens will begin developing ideas and seeking new commercial partnerships. There are many options that have not yet been explored. One option not currently under consideration is charging an entry fee to access the Botanic Gardens. This has been well covered by the Hon. Tammy Franks. I thank her for tabling the letter, so I will not go over that letter again.

The Hon. T.A. Franks: Two letters.

The Hon. E.S. BOURKE: Two letters, sorry, thank you, the Hon. Tammy Franks. It has been made clear that the act currently permits the charging of entry fees. The board has made it clear that they have no plans to begin charging entry fees for the public for general access and there is no reason to suggest that changes proposed in this bill lead to the current arrangements being changed. However, it is the case that under the current arrangements, fees are applied for access to certain special events and services. Regulated charges apply for the range of the gardens' sites and services. These are reviewed on an annual basis.

It is regrettable that the opposition has chosen to spread misinformation about this and to such an extent that the board of the Botanic Gardens asked the opposition to publicly correct the record. As I said, the Hon. Tammy Franks read and tabled the letters that were written to the opposition leader. The Advertiser on 22 November had the headline 'Correct the record: Botanic Gardens board berates Libs over picnic tax claims'.

They go on to say that the board's presiding member, Judy Potter, said that Mr Batty from the other place was personally briefed about the board having no 'intention to levy a general entry charge to the botanic gardens'. It is therefore disappointing that they continued to run this misinformation.

I would hope that across all sides of the chamber we can all agree that the Botanic Gardens of South Australia are a fantastic asset to our community. They contribute wonderfully to public enjoyment, tourism and conservation. In November last year, the Adelaide Botanic Gardens was named as a 'Garden of the world worth travelling for in 2024' at the International Garden Tourism Awards, a well-deserved recognition of excellence. All our Botanic Gardens, as well as our state board, are cherished institutions that we are fortunate to have in our community.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (12:37): I rise very briefly to speak in support of this bill and, more importantly, to echo the sentiments just expressed by the Hon. Tammy Franks and the Hon. Ms Bourke. I feel compelled to do so because of the misinformation that has, once again, caused undue unrest in the community as a result of fearmongering by the opposition.

The first point I will make is that—and I think the Hon. Tammy Franks has summed this up perfectly, so I am not going to repeat everything she said—the fact we are back here having to speak to something to quell what has become a frenzy in the community amongst those who love visiting the Botanic Gardens, the undue consternation in the community over something that was never at risk, is disappointing, especially to do so under the guise of wanting to protect and preserve those gardens for public access. I think the opposition should reflect on the comments that have been made in this place today with respect to an apology because we have all been offered the same briefings.

I find myself questioning: if we were so concerned about this picnic tax, why it is that the opposition when they were in government never sought to amend the legislation, given that it has always provided the gardens with the ability to charge for admission, if that was ever their intention? The simple answer to that is because we all know that that has never been their intention, despite those provisions having existed in this legislation for so many years.

This should have been—and I am hoping after this it will be—a relatively simple passage of this bill, but the reality is that we have all had the benefit of enjoying these gardens, which are immaculate and are renowned around the world. It does not help stirring up these sorts of campaigns and undoing the amazing work that the good people at the Botanic Gardens do.

On that note, I acknowledge also the briefings and discussions I have had with the Director of the Botanic Gardens, Mr Michael Harvey—who is here with us today, in fact—not only for the amazing work that he has done, and hard work I have to say, because we know that this legislation has not been changed since 1978. It takes an extraordinary amount of money, and everybody at the gardens works on what can only be described as a very tight budget to provide to the South Australian community, and indeed the broader community, the gift that is the Botanic Gardens in South Australia.

Rather than focus on the amazing work that is done at the Botanic Gardens to make that such a special spot in Adelaide, we have sought to stir up this media frenzy around picnic taxes and things that just were never envisaged. I do question the opposition's intentions around that, particularly given they always had the ability to fix this when they were in government.

I should also note that times have moved significantly since 1978, and so if we want to be able to maintain those beautiful gardens to the level that we have today, then obviously the gardens have to become, I suppose, more adaptable and more creative in the sorts of things that they can do there, the special events that we all visit and enjoy at the gardens, which do enable them to raise the capital to be able to keep the gardens in the pristine condition that they are in now.

That was really the intention of this bill, nothing else. I did not enjoy the phone calls either saying, 'You are not going to support the picnic tax, and you are not going to support the parking fees that are going to be implemented by the gardens,' because we know that that was never the intention. I thank everybody at the gardens, not only for the amazing work they do to keep them in the pristine condition they do, on the budget that they have, but also for correcting the record in relation to what the intention behind this piece of legislation is.

I fully support the comments that other members have made in this place, and they have done a much more eloquent job than I have. I thank everybody at the gardens again for correcting the record, not just for our sake but for the sake of all South Australians who enjoy and benefit from those pristine gardens.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (12:42): I thank all honourable members for their contributions on this bill. The government is certainly looking forward to passing this bill and putting behind us the shameful and harmful misinformation campaign that so many people have referred to that was instigated by the opposition, and passing the bill to enable the board of the Botanic Gardens to modernise and continue its operations.

As has been set out by the Deputy Premier, in another place, and by members here, the bill's primary purpose is to clarify the board's ability to raise money in diverse ways to support the work of the organisation. These amendments bring the act closer in line with the SA Museum and Art Gallery SA acts and other acts of jurisdictions establishing such comparable bodies.

Despite the efforts of many members opposite to mislead the public—many of whom are already struggling with cost-of-living pressures—there has never been, as has been articulated by other members and in correspondence from the Botanic Gardens board itself, an intention to introduce things such as paid parking on Sundays, nor to charge any sort of admission fee, general admission fee to the gardens, nor to charge for parking at the Wittunga Botanic Gardens. With that, I commend the bill to the chamber and look forward to the committee stage.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (12:46): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

Sitting suspended from 12:46 to 14:16.

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