Letters to the Editor on peak bodies backing MotoGP
This week, InDaily readers give their opinions on peak bodies backing MotoGP with rousing support from night-time industries.
Responding to Exclusive: Trio of peak business bodies throw support behind MotoGP
On behalf of the SA Alliance for Night-Time Industries (SAANTI), I write to express our strong support for the state government’s efforts to secure the MotoGP for Adelaide. We stand alongside our industry partners at the Property Council, AHA SA, the SA Business Chamber and the Committee for Adelaide in supporting this ambition.
Securing a global event of this magnitude is about far more than a single weekend of racing. Major events generate substantial economic activity that flows directly into Adelaide’s broader visitor and night-time economies. Pubs, bars, restaurants, live music and entertainment venues, hotels and other hospitality businesses all benefit from the increased visitation and activity these events generate.
At a time when hospitality and entertainment operators continue to face rising operating costs and subdued discretionary spending, attracting major events that bring interstate and international visitors to South Australia is increasingly important.
Great cities embrace ambition. If Adelaide is to strengthen its reputation as an internationally competitive events city, we need a regulatory culture that is facilitative, responsive and focused on how well-managed events can proceed safely and successfully, rather than allowing unnecessary regulatory barriers to constrain opportunity.
It is time to stop treating major events and the night-time economy as liabilities to be managed and instead recognise them as important economic and cultural assets to be supported, valued and promoted.
SAANTI commends the Premier and the state government for pursuing opportunities of this scale. Securing the MotoGP would further strengthen Adelaide’s events calendar while delivering benefits well beyond the circuit and into businesses throughout the city. – Antonio Tropeano
These men do not represent small business. They represent the corporate and property interests that are the main beneficiaries of major events. Adelaide has fallen victim to men in blue suits peddling their trickle-down economics, exacerbating the wealth divide between small and large business. They consistently use their significant platforms to lump all businesses together.
Their tactic, and it sings from the same song sheet as the government, is to lump all major events together – if you’re against MotoGP, you must be against Fringe and Gather Round as well. If you’re against MotoGP, you must be against vibrancy and development and progress.
Motorsport in the CBD is unique in the massive negative impacts it has on residents, small businesses, CBD workers, park lands and a host of other social, economic, community and environmental areas.
These are all very well documented. What is not documented is any positive impact – just politicians and wealthy blowhards telling us what’s good for us. – Nick Patrick
Responding to ‘Takes guts’: Eminent South Australians rejecting govt plans
Well said. This proposal demands genuine and meaningful public consultation, not a token exercise after the government has already made up its mind. South Australians deserve to know the full financial, environmental and traffic impacts before $96 million of public money is committed and our precious park lands are altered.
The government must stop, properly consult the community, publish the evidence and listen to South Australians before proceeding. – Trevor Elburn
It is disgusting to think the government is using taxpayers’ money to build a racetrack. The money should be spent where needed – on the homeless and on hospitals. It will ruin the parklands. This is to get votes for the Labor Party. For goodness’ sake, be realistic. I will never vote Labor – they spend money unwisely on the racetrack. No, no, no to the racetrack. – Sharron Mathew
As always, where is the money coming from? Labor harps on about the economic benefit it will bring to the state, based on spending unlimited amounts of our money, mainly borrowed, but will not reveal the actual cost above the track cost. The cost of getting the event is also with our money, so why are we not able to know the amount?
Confidential does not cut it – it is our money, not theirs. – Colin Gaetjens
Responding to City residents claim new tower robs daylight
You might like
As a resident of the Alpha Apartments and someone who will be very significantly affected by this development, I wanted to respond to your article.
What surprises me and what saddens me immensely is that at no point throughout this planning and approval process has there been any consideration of the people who already live directly beside it.
One detail in the architectural drawings that is important to note is that the Alpha Apartment Complex is repeatedly and only labelled as a “nine-storey building”.
When a neighbouring building is treated like this, rather than as homes with bedrooms, living rooms, balconies and people behind the windows, is it a surprise that the human side of the story can disappear from the planning conversation?
Yes, it complied, but what do they say to the residents whose natural light, privacy and daily living environment will be permanently affected?
Of course, we always knew this site would eventually be developed. What we didn’t expect was that there would be little to no thought given to the people who already live here.
What troubles me most is the absence of the human question from the planning process.
With a 21-storey project, and only four residential floors of Alpha directly affected, was there ever a serious attempt to consider greater setbacks, different orientation, different window placement or another treatment of those four levels?
What does it say about our planning system and, more broadly, about how we value people if a major development can be judged entirely by whether it complies with the rules, while the lived experience of the people already there barely (if in fact at all) enters the conversation? – Serna Wright
The South Australian government under Premier Peter Malinauskas has lost its way.
Labor governments are supposed to be on the side of the people, but lately we have seen multiple examples of government decisions that have trashed public sentiment.
Yes, a vibrant, tourist-attracting city is important, but it should not come at too great a cost. People are genuinely grieving the widespread destruction of trees in Adelaide’s iconic park lands for the sake of golf and a motorbike race.
It would not surprise me if the premier’s popularity among women voters in particular has plummeted. In my opinion, prioritising a festival of testosterone-fuelled events in the current manosphere cultural crisis is counterproductive to the city’s appeal.
There’s a correlation between the 2018 downfall of Premier Mike Rann and his arrogant Planning Minister John Rau, and the attitudes of Premier Malinauskas and current Planning Minister Nick Champion in dismissing legitimate concerns about developments that deny residents amenities such as natural daylight.
So, I’d really like to know what is given priority in development-related, and for that matter, all government decisions – is it the welfare of the people or the economy? – Carol Faulkner
Responding to Axe falls on festival after twenty years
Many of us have been very upset by the cancellation of the OzAsia Festival, which over the past 19 years has attracted more than 200,000 attendees each time, which attests to its popularity and success. It is the only festival of its kind in Australia.
The Arts Minister has said that there have been no government funding cuts to the Adelaide Festival Centre and the decision was made solely by the new CEO and her board. Her defence is that ticket sales are in decline, and if that is so, then it is because of poor management, which can be rectified with better marketing strategies and selection of better programs. It really is a cop-out to cancel the festival altogether.
She has said that there will be more shows throughout the year. But the two are not mutually exclusive – we can have both if properly managed. Also, single shows do not have the exhilarating carnival-like atmosphere of a festival.
The OzAsia festival has always had something for all age groups. It has connected hundreds of thousands together with the wonderful collective purpose of enjoying the diverse Asian cultures through plays, music, dance, movies, art displays, intellectual forums by writers from OzAsia and a variety of food and drinks, thereby exposing us all to the diverse cultures of the region in which Australia is located. – Judy Koh
Responding to ‘Nature positive’: Park lands pledge from SA environment boss
Adelaide is the driest capital city in Australia’s driest state. South Australia is already facing severe drought, algal blooms and H5 bird flu, while the state remains in a climate emergency declared by the state government in 2022.
Yet hundreds of mature park lands trees are now threatened by the proposed MotoGP development.
Before the 2026 election, the Premier told the public that just 45 significant trees would need to be removed. The current proposal identifies 377 trees within the circuit footprint, almost 10 times the amount.
This comes after significant tree loss associated with the Women’s and Children’s Hospital, the North Adelaide Golf Course redevelopment and the Adelaide Aquatic Centre – bringing the estimated total loss to around a staggering 1,400 mature park lands trees.
So where does the line get drawn?
Our park lands are not a development site. They are irreplaceable natural assets that provide shade, cooling, vital wildlife habitat, connected canopy and respite in a city facing an increasingly difficult climate.
Enough is enough. The government must stop the further loss of mature trees and protect our Park Lands for future generations.
If MotoGP is truly “nature positive”, then prove it – save the trees. – Jane Preston
I have been tracking the intense local fallout following Premier Peter Malinauskas’s release of the $96 million Adelaide MotoGP track design.
Stay informed, daily
While the government is heavily promoting the event’s $200 million economic projections and a $15 million “Nature Positive” sweetener, their own public data reveals a massive transparency gap that warrants a deeper investigative look.
When MotoGP was first announced in February, the public was assured that about 45 significant trees would be affected. Fast-forward to the official blueprints released just days ago, and that figure has quietly ballooned to 377 trees slated for destruction – including 42 designated significant trees – cutting directly through a National Heritage-listed landscape.
What makes this a compelling accountability story right now is the timing and the process.
The new 4.13-kilometre track design directly encroaches on the Victoria Park/Pakapakanthi Wetland, a sanctuary built in 2022 using separate public funds for urban cooling and biodiversity.
Public consultation has been heavily compressed, closing on Sunday, September 20, 2026. The survey itself has already drawn sharp criticism from the Adelaide City Council for its highly restrictive format.
Committing $96 million in taxpayer funds to permanent motorsport infrastructure – plus the extra $15 million mitigation package – while South Australians are navigating a severe cost-of-living crisis and growing state debt.
The story here is not just about motorbikes versus trees; it’s a classic case of government “bait-and-switch” messaging. – Jill Gearey
Responding to ‘Diabolical thing’: Hotels boss slams council’s MotoGP consultation
Anna Moeller’s description of Adelaide City Council’s MotoGP consultation as a “diabolical thing masquerading as a survey” should be rejected, not normalised.
Moeller is paid to represent hotels and pubs, whose members stand to benefit from more visitors, bookings, meals and drinks. That is entirely legitimate. But the Australian Hotels Association does not represent Adelaide, still less the public interest.
The Malinauskas Government, Tourism Minister, tourism agencies and hospitality industry already have enormous opportunities to promote MotoGP’s supposed benefits. Why, then, is it “negative” or “diabolical” when an elected council asks about the other side of the ledger: 377 trees, disrupted sport, road closures, public access, and months of interference with the Park Lands?
Apparently, hotel bookings are economics, while costs borne by citizens are negativity.
Anna Moeller represents the AHA. Adelaide City Council represents a city.
Hotels don’t own Adelaide. MotoGP does not own Adelaide. Peter Malinauskas does not own Adelaide. Asking citizens what they think about surrendering more of their Park Lands is not “diabolical”.
It is democracy. – Stewart Sweeney
As both a city resident and a city business operator over the last three decades, I find the current elected members to be too influenced by the residential vote to the detriment of city businesses. – Andrew Hudson
I find it shocking that hoteliers find the Adelaide City Council’s consultation on the parklands MotoGP “relentlessly negative”.
Very ironic too, given that the South Australian government’s sham of a “consultation” (only available until recently, buried on the DIT website) does not allow any alternative views other than Malinauskas’s one of a single man determined to run roughshod over the people of Adelaide and South Australia, developing on the park lands with reckless abandon.
Considering myself one of the “silent majority”, I can no longer sit by as this government ruins us by delving deeper into debt and beholden to commercial (and not public) interests.
I am disappointed and angry. I know I am not alone. He should be ashamed. – Sarah McCarthy
Responding to The Big Steal: Top journo’s warning ahead of Whyalla Steelworks sale
My former partner’s father lives in South Africa and was visiting shortly after it was announced that Sanjeev Gupta was buying the steelworks.
He was scathing – and genuinely shocked – that yet another government was seemingly prepared to fall for the family’s claims, despite their reputation and history being well-known around the world.
At the time, I had no idea what he was talking about.
So, I did a little digging.
What I found was concerning. And it left me wondering whether our government had done any digging at all before handing the keys over. – Shane (surname withheld)
Responding to Transport boss rules out T2D blowout
A much bigger issue is the refusal of the government to release detailed cost-benefit analysis for the T2D project. The cost has been estimated at $15 billion, but the benefits, according to a comment from the department CEO, are estimated at only $9 billion.
Despite many requests to the department, they have refused to provide the detailed cost-benefit analysis. If the disclosed figures are correct, it makes the T2D project one of the worst public investments ever undertaken in South Australia. – Brett Rowse
Responding to Former top public servant questions MotoGP economic benefits
This proposal reminds me of Joni Mitchell’s lyrics, “they paved paradise and put up a parking lot”.
But it is only 350 big trees, about 100 years old, for most of them.
More noise and pollution in the city, especially for the residents.
It is a very short-term project that will lose our heritage. – Phillip Bohringer
Responding to Controversial Writers’ Week author shortlisted for top SA literary prize
Looking at the list of authors for these awards, it really does explain why I have absolutely no interest in the current Writers’ Week and the so-called top SA literary prizes supported by our socialist government. – Eric Taylor
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.
