State Election 2022 - Question #2
Legislative Protection
We advised each party that your Adelaide Park Lands are being gradually eroded and there is no effective mechanism to halt or impose a limit on the extent of losses. The Adelaide Park Lands Act 2005 has been ineffective at preventing continual losses of Open Green Public Space to development.
We asked: “If elected, what type of amendments to the Act would you initiate or support to provide real Park Lands protection?” Here’s what each party replied:
| Party | Party Response | APA evaluation | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pauline Hanson's One Nation | It is quite simple no further development. A simple ban on further development. | This is too simple and shows lack of understanding about the meaning of “development”. A total ban on development would prevent even earthworks such as new wetlands and would also prevent restoration of Park Lands. | 2 |
| Real Change SA | The Adelaide City Council should be divested of their control as (a) they have more than enough to do in the city of Adelaide to keep them occupied and (b) the interests of the Council do not always necessarily equate with the interests of South Australians. A dedicated and specialised body should be created with real power to manage the parklands subject to Parliament. | The problem is not so much the City Council as the State Government. Nevertheless a dedicated and specialised Trust might be required. | 7 |
| Liberal Democratic Party | I would support amendments that empower hobby, recreational, sport, and community groups to purchase or lease parts of the parklands to protect them for their hobby activity, recreational activity, sport, and/or community. The only way to provide meaningful protection is to empower citizens rather than enlarge government. | This is a recipe for wholesale privatisation of the Park Lands. | -10 |
| Animal Justice Party | A rule on maintaining a certain percentage of Open Green Public Space should be enshrined in the Adelaide Park Lands Act 2005. | “A certain percentage” is insufficient (without more clarification) although better than the absence of any rule in the present Act. | 5 |
| Greens | One of the problems with the existing act is that the Adelaide Park Lands Authority does not have the power to protect the Park Lands. Ensuring the independence of APLA and giving the body real teeth to protect our public green space is an area the Greens would like to pursue by amendment. Additionally, in October last year I moved to amend the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act to ensure that any amendment to the Planning and Design Code that relates to development in the Adelaide Parklands must be approved by resolution of both houses of parliament. This would have prevented the government of the day from rezoning the Park Lands without appropriate parliamentary scrutiny. Sadly, the bill was defeated with no major party in support. I intend to revisit this in the new parliament. | This is a specific proposal for reform. Obviously the devil would be in the detail but it reflects a recognition that the Act is not achieving protection of the Park Lands. | 8 |
| Liberal Party | Should the Adelaide Park Lands Authority (APLA) and City of Adelaide propose future amendments to the Act the Government will consider them in the coming term. | The answer devolves responsibility for proposing any amendment to the Park Lands Authority and the City Council. The response fails to acknowledge that the Act has been unsuccessful in protecting Park Lands. | 3 |
| SA Labor | Labor will ensure the membership of the Park Lands Authority reflects the skills and experience required by the Act, including knowledge of biodiversity and cultural heritage. | This promises only the status quo. | 1 |
| SA Best | We would … strongly advocate for a full scale review of the Adelaide Park Lands Act 2005 to ensure that it is fit for purpose into the future, given the rapid expansion and encroachment of infill and new developments, demolishing of important areas of parklands in the name of “development”. These losses can not be recovered and SA Best will strongly fight to protect the Park Lands through modernised and reformed legislation reflective of current knowledge and science (social and physical), economics and sustainability principles. | Support for a “full-scale review” of the Act is very welcome. | 7 |
| SA Party (Sustainable Australia) | SA Party supports the bid for the Adelaide Parklands to be recognised by UNESCO for World Heritage Listing. We would advocate for this in parliament if elected and urge the State Government and South Australian community to support the bid. | That would be a strong protection. The reference to zoning is relevant to question 4. | 8 |
