Premier takes a swing at ‘cultural elitism’ in park lands debate
The Premier has teed off against MotoGP and new golf greens critics as the government’s lawyers present their case for redeveloping the park lands in the Federal Court.
Premier Peter Malinauskas has promoted the state government’s park lands development projects in parliament saying he rejected “cultural elitism” around the city’s green belt.
In response to questions from Liberal spokesperson Jack Batty about tree felling for the MotoGP track, Malinauskas said in Question Time yesterday that “the distinction between us and you is that we believe the park lands are there for people to be able to enjoy the natural environment”.
“People are able to enjoy the park lands without fear of judgement about what is culturally appropriate for the park lands and what isn’t,” Malinauskas said.
“I reject any idea of a cultural elitism that says to people who might be interested in motorsport that they are not welcome whereas other people might be.”
Malinauskas also faced questioning by Opposition Leader Ashton Hurn on tree loss linked to new plans being drafted to build a MotoGP course partially on park lands and whether he had consulted the community over the track with construction set to begin in December this year.
“I have given instructions to the Motor Sport Board that have been very clear, and they are not too dissimilar to the instructions that we gave to the golf course designers in North Adelaide: that we expect them to minimise tree loss at any and every opportunity they have,” he said.
You might like
“We have been very plain that the government is committed to a public consultation period following the completion of the draft design of the track for the MotoGP.”
It comes as another “Stop the Chop” protest over park lands tree felling is planned for Sunday, and well-known author and History Council of South Australia board of trustees member Lainie Anderson has weighed in on the public debate.
“I don’t want Premier Peter Malinauskas to think the wider population doesn’t care about the parklands. I don’t want him to think my vote for Labor at the March election was a vote for a city-based Australian MotoGP at any cost,” Anderson wrote on Facebook.
“I am more pragmatic than many about development. I support developing the golf course, for example. It’s already a public course enjoyed by SA golfers, on land that was virtually barren in the 1930s, so why not bring it up to 21st-century standard for locals, golf tourists and international events that will boost the local economy?
“But I do not support removing significant trees and changing the heritage landscape of our parklands for a MotoGP that will reap similar economic rewards (and likely be safer for riders) at The Bend.”
Meanwhile, the state government’s lawyer Alison Doecke KC appeared in Federal Court on Wednesday, as the trial over referring the golf course development to Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt under the Environment, Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act continues.
Stay informed, daily
Public servant Edwin Kemp Attrill and Kaurna traditional owner Janette Milera commenced proceedings in June to test the North Adelaide Golf Course Act passed by the state government last year against federal environment and heritage legislation.
Kemp Attrill and Milera’s lawyers have argued large-scale tree removal and the demolition and rebuild of the existing golf course clubhouse “contravened” the heritage values of the park lands and caused a “public affront”.
The Adelaide Park Lands were nationally heritage-listed in 2008.
In her opening remarks on Wednesday, Doecke asked the judge to look at the park lands “from a broader aerial perspective” rather than “drill down” to the parks being redeveloped for the golf course.
“Your Honour has heard about the mini golf facilities, the practice areas, in addition to the driving range, those off-course golf facilities will increase amenity and undertake a function of what is called activating the space or increased public use, which will provide for active recreational use,” she said.
“And we say that the precise balance of the different uses of different parts of the park lands is not a matter which is protected by the national heritage values, so as to prevent change.”
She argued that the existing North Adelaide Golf Course clubhouse built in the 1920s, “does not have local or state heritage protection, nor is the building specifically protected by the national heritage values”.
While Kemp Attrill and Milera’s case focused on the grey-headed flying fox being threatened by tree loss, Doecke said the bat species had many other trees to forage in throughout the broader park lands.
The number and types of trees being felled for the golf course project continue to be debated, with Doecke saying “it is not possible to put before your honour the species of the trees that are going to be removed”.
In an earlier cross-examination, Kemp Attrill agreed when Doecke asked: “there’s still an awful lot of trees on this site, isn’t there?”
Want to see more stories from InDaily SA in your Google search results?
- Click here to set InDaily SA as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "InDaily SA". That's it.
