2018 South Australian State Election

[SBD]

South Australia is perfectly positioned to grow and help meet this increased demand, with our rich farming land

Is this the farmland of the Adelaide plains that we are rapidly building suburbs on top of?

Most of the land that the housing estates in Playford are spreading onto has been "reserved" for a very long time, and growing at most a bit of pasture hay, not the premium market gardens further out west and north. There seems to be a bit getting built on a vineyard near the Northern Expressway, but that land was previously munitions stores, not market gardens anyway. Also an olive and almond orchard seems to have disappeared for the "Almond Grove" estate - which no longer has so many almond trees around it.

[JAKJ]

Labor has no focus on SME or small business (or regional growth), its focus has always been on a heavy public service and cherry picking tax payer funded business incentives to try and provide the look of growth.

The state has also done nothing to address the population slump, they are actually against population growth going by their policies.

I understand Labor SA is pretty Teflon when it comes to being accountable for anything, but to suggest external factors are all to blame for the economic position of SA is pathetic, we have had systematic decline in the state over 20 years, which the predominately Labor period of Government has failed to do anything about.

Without significant Federal funding (both parties) and a fortunate distribution of GST carve up we have been able to sustain the state as an attractive place to live (albeit less people actually want to live here). But how long is that going to last? I would suggest it the other states get their way and the GST carve up is changed and our population growth inevitably creeps in to negative, not long.

Having lived through the decline all I can say is that I am more positive now than at any point during the previous liberal government. I remember the Olsen years and how little was achieved - if not for the massive expenditure on the colins + expansion at olympic dam nothing was achieved by that government.

The most effective way to support SMEs is by helping create industries and markets that provide an opportunity for growth. The competition for capital is a global game these days, South Australia needs to establish and advertise a niche to attract investment, people and organisations. Heavily focusing on education and high-tech industry, like renewables, and publicly broadcasting this to the worlds' investors through high-profile relationships (Tesla) is the most effective way to bring in capital and create those opportunities for local business otherwise we will forever be relying on State/ Federal government handouts. I work in an area that deals significantly with SMEs and while I am sure some traditional SMEs in this state are struggling, there are many new ones that have taken advantage of these opportunities and are doing well.

You are right, GST has helped and has proven a useful mechanism for federal fiscal transfers that has supported our state during its slump, which is part of how our Federation works (otherwise what's the point?). Inflation adjusted, WA for all its whinging has received far more investment from the commonwealth since Federation than it has given back (100 years of being a net recipient vs 10 years of being a net contributor).

[Nort]

South Australia is perfectly positioned to grow and help meet this increased demand, with our rich farming land

Is this the farmland of the Adelaide plains that we are rapidly building suburbs on top of?

Most of the land that the housing estates in Playford are spreading onto has been "reserved" for a very long time, and growing at most a bit of pasture hay, not the premium market gardens further out west and north. There seems to be a bit getting built on a vineyard near the Northern Expressway, but that land was previously munitions stores, not market gardens anyway. Also an olive and almond orchard seems to have disappeared for the "Almond Grove" estate - which no longer has so many almond trees around it.

If they want to grow our farms then it probably requires land for them to grow onto. South Australia is big and while lots of it has uses for some forms of farming (especially roaming livestock and the like) it's a bit of a stretch to describe the majority of the state as "rich farming land"

[JAKJ]

To benefit the state economy from mining, we need (preferably) established mining towns with miners who live there with their families and go to work locally (Roxby Downs, former Leigh Creek) or fly-in-fly-out mines with flights only to SA airports. Most modern mines are relatively short-lived ventures in remote places (Carrapateena is expected to be 20 years), so the cost of establishing a town - hospital, schools, car dealership, range of shops,... cannot be justified. Establishing long-lived mines is expensive (and requires huge ore bodies to be found), and shorter ones near existing towns or settled areas receive resistance from the neighbours (e.g. Angas, Hillside, Bird in Hand, Iron Road).

I don't know what policy settings are more likely to encourage establishment of large long-lived mining that could support permanent settlements, so I can't tell which party(s) might be offering the best chances.

A very good point. Having seen first hand how resource companies operate in places like the Pilbara, it feels like the general population of Australia doesn't understand how good the deals these companies have here compared to their operations in other countries and how much of our nations wealth is being extracted with comparatively little to show for it. The take-down of the R-G-R government over the "resource tax" and then the WA Nationals leader over iron ore royalty adjustments show the power these organisations have to lobby government and fund scare campaigns to maintain their very favorable status quo.

For example (and similar scenarios apply to all the majors at present); Rio's 2017 profit was $US8.8billion with over 70% of that profit derived from its Pilbara iron ore operations alone. Mining in Australia is fantastic from a strategic point of view as you can invest in high capital long-term projects with lengthy payback periods (30-50 years mines) with some of the lowest sovereign risk anywhere and great proximity to major markets (Asia) vs South America or Africa. We should be charging these companies a premium in royalties due to almost-guaranteed long term stability compared to these other producers, instead our effective tax regime is comparatively low, with pushes to make it even lower championed by governments under the cover of a dubious misapplication of free-market principles to an industry which is a natural monopoly/ oligopoly.

Neither party appears willing to take these issues on, so you end up with ridiculous situations such as in Karratha where Woodside wants to build an 800 bed camp in the middle of a full-service city of 22,000 people instead of supporting the community with a residential workforce.

[SBD]

To benefit the state economy from mining, we need (preferably) established mining towns with miners who live there with their families and go to work locally (Roxby Downs, former Leigh Creek) or fly-in-fly-out mines with flights only to SA airports. Most modern mines are relatively short-lived ventures in remote places (Carrapateena is expected to be 20 years), so the cost of establishing a town - hospital, schools, car dealership, range of shops,... cannot be justified. Establishing long-lived mines is expensive (and requires huge ore bodies to be found), and shorter ones near existing towns or settled areas receive resistance from the neighbours (e.g. Angas, Hillside, Bird in Hand, Iron Road).

I don't know what policy settings are more likely to encourage establishment of large long-lived mining that could support permanent settlements, so I can't tell which party(s) might be offering the best chances.

A very good point. Having seen first hand how resource companies operate in places like the Pilbara, it feels like the general population of Australia doesn't understand how good the deals these companies have here compared to their operations in other countries and how much of our nations wealth is being extracted with comparatively little to show for it. The take-down of the R-G-R government over the "resource tax" and then the WA Nationals leader over iron ore royalty adjustments show the power these organisations have to lobby government and fund scare campaigns to maintain their very favorable status quo.

For example (and similar scenarios apply to all the majors at present); Rio's 2017 profit was $US8.8billion with over 70% of that profit derived from its Pilbara iron ore operations alone. Mining in Australia is fantastic from a strategic point of view as you can invest in high capital long-term projects with lengthy payback periods (30-50 years mines) with some of the lowest sovereign risk anywhere and great proximity to major markets (Asia) vs South America or Africa. We should be charging these companies a premium in royalties due to almost-guaranteed long term stability compared to these other producers, instead our effective tax regime is comparatively low, with pushes to make it even lower championed by governments under the cover of a dubious misapplication of free-market principles to an industry which is a natural monopoly/ oligopoly.

Neither party appears willing to take these issues on, so you end up with ridiculous situations such as in Karratha where Woodside wants to build an 800 bed camp in the middle of a full-service city of 22,000 people instead of supporting the community with a residential workforce.

The net effect of reducing company tax and increasing royalties could be close to neutral on the mining companies, and have the lower-tax benefits for other businesses (including supplying their equipment and workforce). However one of the downsides of our federal system is that cannot happen as we gave up income tax to the Federal government a long time ago, but the states still hold the mineral rights and royalties, so the changes can't be matched on the Government side.

[Waewick]

Is this the farmland of the Adelaide plains that we are rapidly building suburbs on top of?

Most of the land that the housing estates in Playford are spreading onto has been "reserved" for a very long time, and growing at most a bit of pasture hay, not the premium market gardens further out west and north. There seems to be a bit getting built on a vineyard near the Northern Expressway, but that land was previously munitions stores, not market gardens anyway. Also an olive and almond orchard seems to have disappeared for the "Almond Grove" estate - which no longer has so many almond trees around it.

If they want to grow our farms then it probably requires land for them to grow onto. South Australia is big and while lots of it has uses for some forms of farming (especially roaming livestock and the like) it's a bit of a stretch to describe the majority of the state as "rich farming land"

SA has some great farming land and some world best practices for using water resources and the production of premium food and wine.

Some of it is in and around the city limits but otherwise in regional SA.

NSW, QLD and Vic are already investing in these areas because of the growth opportunities.

Unfortunately Labor is as ignorant as many Adelaide folk on things outside the city limits.

[Waewick]

You mean 16 yrs ago.....just after the biggest financial crisis this state had ever seen and a recession.

Yes I agree the federal government has delivered alot for this state, the shipbuilding program ( thanks Labor!) Looks like it will be something that provides much need wealth and opportunity to the state.

I can only assume you are PAYG, because your sentiments do not match that of the business community or pretty much every measure of the states position.

[SRW]

SA Labor has championed the Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme, which will add far more value to the state’s agricultural industry than $1.2 million for marketing. Not to say those funds aren’t also needed, but it’s pretty blinded to conclude the Liberals have a better plan for farming/food production.

[Waewick]

SA Labor has championed the Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme, which will add far more value to the state’s agricultural industry than $1.2 million for marketing. Not to say those funds aren’t also needed, but it’s pretty blinded to conclude the Liberals have a better plan for farming/food production.

Again, the Northern irrigation scheme is in city limits. Also in Labor territory.

[Norman]

Election 2018: Adelaide Riverbank Authority to be scrapped by Liberal Party to speed up precinct development
Exclusive, Jade Gailberger, The Advertiser
33 minutes ago

LIBERAL leader Steven Marshall is vowing to “turbocharge” the development of Adelaide’s multi-billion dollar Riverbank precinct, by scrapping the government authority he says has failed to progress the key tourism, cultural and sporting hub.

The Riverbank, stretching from Bowden to Hackney, encompasses the state’s biomedical, entertainment, arts and education precincts and is the key focus of Adelaide’s revitalisation. Labor in 2014 established the Riverbank Authority to provide advice about cohesion and implement a development masterplan.

The authority’s chairman Andrew McEvoy – former South Australian Tourism Commission boss – last year blamed the council for slowing down developments and called for the Government to strip it of its power in the Riverbank precinct.

But Liberal leader Steven Marshall accused the authority of failing to improve the area and said disbanding it would save taxpayers up to $3.2 million over the next term of government.

“Labor’s Riverbank Authority has been a failure and will be scrapped,” he said. “The authority was set up in 2014 to make recommendations about major infrastructure proposals and co-ordinate development of the riverbank precinct, but little in the way of new development has been secured since its formation.

“The authority’s brief included the old Royal Adelaide Hospital site but development plans stalled, while there’s been no significant progress in other areas either.”

Mr Marshall said the slow growth in the area was an indictment of the Labor Government, which made the decision to relocate the hospital in 2007. He said greater consultation was needed with people along the Riverbank who have not been engaged by the “expensive” authority.

“We would like to get the major groups, entertainment, sporting and culture together to basically turbo charge the redevelopment in that area,” he said.

The Liberals estimate scrapping the authority would save taxpayers up to $800,000 a year.

In an interview with The Advertiser before the Liberal announcement, Mr McEvoy acknowledged the pace of developments was slow, which he attributed to red tape.

He said “more than 30 pieces of legislation govern the Riverbank precinct” and that “if you really want great development, that needs to be simplified”. Mr McEvoy argued that the authority’s strength was that it had experts to inform decisions, compared to elected members, who merely had opinions.

Interesting, I'm not exactly sure how removing the authority will accelerate development in this area when the real blocker seems to be the city council. Are the ideas not good enough? We all remember the light display that was planned, but later panned, by the council.

Martin Haese and the battle for Adelaide
Jade Gailberger, SA Weekend
an hour ago

MARTIN Haese likes to keep things on an even keel. Don’t lose your temper. Stick to the argument. But right now Adelaide’s mild-mannered Lord Mayor is quivering with outrage.

It’s November last year, and the Riverbank Authority has just whacked the city council with a political king-hit the mayor did not see coming.

The source of the trouble is a plan by the authority – a body appointed by the State Government, and not elected by anybody – to spend $600,000 to illuminate the city banks of the Torrens.

Let there be light? No. The council hates the light design, and two days before has given it the thumbs down – for the second time. Too glitzy, the councillors decide. Too Gold Coast.

But Riverbank Authority boss Andrew McEvoy is not taking this lying down. Furious, the former head of Tourism Australia has come out swinging to urge the State Government to “step in and legislate” to take over the entire riverbank precinct for the sake of “our city and its future”.

In other words, strip the council of any say in the city’s new billion dollar hotspot where development meets park lands.

As city editor on The Advertiser, I’d had coffee with Haese that morning and asked him about the lights decision. He’d not been expecting problems and looked relaxed.

That changed quickly. Soon after McEvoy’s tirade, he calls twice. “I’m very disappointed with Mr McEvoy’s public comments. Some things are better said privately,” he says the first time. “I’ll go a bit further, I think it is wildly inappropriate.”

Then he goes for a walk, gets worked up, and is quickly back on the phone again defending his councillors and ratepayers, who he says contributes $15 million a year towards maintenance of the Riverbank and park lands.

“The Riverbank Authority is the new kid on the block,” he says dismissively. “Would Mr McEvoy like me to send him the bill?”

He apologises for being passionate – “but I am”. And it boils away all night, with texts and more comments from the mayor at 8.30pm, 10pm, and again at 10.29pm.

Three months later, Haese’s had enough. When we suggest boxing gloves for our photograph, he can’t wait. He’s drawing a line in the sand in the battle to run Adelaide.

With the state election looming, Jay Weatherill, Steven Marshall and Nick Xenophon all have their own plans on how to amp up Adelaide’s vibrancy and appeal.

The premier sees better security in the park lands and extending the tram line; Marshall will scrap the Riverbank Authority; and Xenophon wants to triple the number of people living in the CBD. In South Australia, where the capital dominates, the look and reputation of the city has a major impact on how the rest of the world sees the state. No government is going to let a city council elected by a few thousand people run the show entirely. It was Liberal premier Steele Hall 50 years ago who rejected a city council bid to put the Festival Centre in North Adelaide, and insist it go on the riverbank.

But how far should government control go? Especially when we’re talking about one of the key focuses of the “new Adelaide”, the expanse of the Torrens along which billions have been spent on everything from convention centres and a sports stadium to a medical and science precinct with the new Royal Adelaide Hospital and SAHMRI?

The man who got up Haese’s nose last November, Andrew McEvoy, clearly has strong views. At the time they were backed by one of the government’s power players, Transport Minister Stephen Mullighan.

McEvoy has runs on the board when it comes to knowing what attracts people. He ran the SA Tourism Commission, before heading Tourism Australia. Now he’s chairman of the body appointed by Jay Weatherill to co-ordinate the Riverbank.

The authority – an idea raised by then member of the Economic Development Board and Adelaide Crows chairman Rob Chapman – was set up to report to Cabinet and bring cohesion to a precinct McEvoy describes as a jigsaw.

“The Riverbank as a concept is a good one but in reality it is a labyrinth,” he tells SAWeekend. “I sometimes joke that you need to be a good orienteer to get through it. You need a map and a compass because we do not make it easy.”

It needs better paths, signs – and lighting. For him, the fact the council was “publicly deriding it” as too “Gold Coast” and “Las Vegas” for the City of Churches – without giving it due consideration, was “immature” and “proof the decision making process around these things are flawed”.

“It is not the first time the State Government has thought, ‘do you actually override the city and do you actually just take one more player out of it?’” McEvoy says.

“That is part of SA’s problem, it is very much a government city. That constant debate about every single decision has meant that there never has been cohesion, which I think mean cities like Adelaide have missed out on investment.”

McEvoy has a soft spot for Adelaide after spending more than seven years over two stints in the city. “Two of our three kids were born there,” he says. On the other hand, he lives in Sydney.

“Every time I’m in Adelaide I hang out down the Riverbank,” he says. “I run it or walk it every morning or night, I go to the events down there, I’ve been to all the venues.

“If I could have stayed, given my career and where it was going, I would have, though I guess that is one of the issues that Adelaide and South Australia has to face up to. I do worry that the biggest employers are largely government entities.”

He’d like to see more people there. He and others, like Renewal SA chief executive John Hanlon, have supported residential accommodation along the river as well, saying it shouldn’t be a “sacred cow”.

But the biggest disincentive for the private sector is that plans are not approved quickly enough for them to invest the capital and create jobs, he says, unless you are “local and passionate, you will probably be patient”.

“Whoever wins the state election,” says McEvoy, “they need to make a call on do they want a true authority to help guide cohesive, world-class development of what is the best precinct in Adelaide, being the Riverbank.”

But as custodians of the Adelaide Park Lands since Colonel William Light laid out his visionary city plan in the 1800s, Martin Haese is standing firm on council’s position about inappropriate developments and the overcommercialisation of the Riverbank.

“Council does not support any suggestion of residential living along the Riverbank,” he says bluntly. “It fails the ‘public land, public benefit’ test. Would New Yorkers build on Central Park? Would Sydneysiders build on Hyde Park? Absolutely not. Their public officials would be run out of office.”

If anything, he says “the most under-utilised part of the Riverbank precinct is surely the river itself”.

Haese’s dreams consist of light shows, sport races and a public swimming pool protruding into the river.

“Council’s vision for the Riverbank is timeless,” he says. “It is a picturesque place for people … because the City of Adelaide ratepayer has foot the bill for its maintenance. The impending upgrade of Festival Plaza will inject greater night-time activity into the precinct.”

But Haese intends to stand up for more than just the park lands in the CBD. Less than a month before the election he is demanding to know what each party’s policy is for council’s priority areas – park lands, tourism, heritage, infrastructure, city vibrancy and business. How are the major parties going to make the city more vibrant?

If there’s one thing the three main political players agree on it is that Adelaide needs a big, bold vision to attract people to the city.

Weatherill sees the city as “a machine to drive jobs”, although critics might point out that in recent times it’s been the agricultural sector driving private jobs while, overall, SA created only 1.7 per cent of the nation’s new jobs in the past five years.

He says Adelaide is “our arrowhead to attract people, businesses, investors, visitors, students, people that generate ideas – they are all attracted by your city”.

Despite criticism from regional South Australians who feel ignored by lack of investment from the Government, the focus on the city’s Riverbank is crucial, and reasoned, he argues.

“It started with the oval,” says Weatherill. “The oval was a critical, psychological investment, a big investment. We made a deliberate attempt to be intensive … so focus our efforts on one part of the city to create a sense of atmosphere and vibrancy.”

And who drove that vision for the Riverbank, stretching from Bowden to Gilberton, in a fourth consecutive term of a Labor Government? “That was me,” says Weatherill, adding later it was “an old idea renewed”.

“The thinking to elevate the city as an economic driver itself … Don Dunstan had it, of course, back in the day. He had the first festival centre in the nation, even before the Sydney Opera House.”

But right now “Adelaide is a work in progress”, says Weatherill. If he had this term as Premier again, the Festival Plaza development – a 24 storey office tower behind Parliament House, with an expansive new public area leading to the river – would have been secured quicker.

“The city has been utterly revitalised by this and then we also use some other public investments to drive it,” he says. Those include the controversial no-right-turn tram extension, small bar licences, more live music venues, spaces for start-ups, and shop trading laws that freed up city traders.

“(The city) is like a resource people can dip in and out of at different times of their life, or different times of the week. Its population swells by a couple of hundred thousand as people commute in, and then go back to the suburbs on the weekends.”

That is the right balance according to Weatherill – “vibrant city, family friendly suburbs” – although he says there is “scope for (population) growth in the CBD”.

If re-elected, Weatherill says there is “a lot of work to be done” across the park lands, and to improve connectivity through the Riverbank precinct so it is accessible and safe.

“Parts of the park lands are still at the moment not attractive, because they don’t appear as safe as they might,” he says. “They’re not as well lit, there’s not enough people using them so you don’t get that passive surveillance of people around.

“To have such a natural environment in the heart of a city, you compare that to things like the Yarra, which is all concrete and steel … that is a unique experience, like a country town.”

Looking good is one thing, but Weatherill also wants it to be a smart city, highly connected with international markets through an ultra-fast broadband network, and public transport networks.

But he is yet to convince the rest of Australia. Market research commissioned by the Capital City Committee last year revealed that less than a fifth of interstate respondents regarded Adelaide as a vibrant, smart, entrepreneurial city. It was however thought of as a “beautiful” and “green” city – which Weatherill says he wants to improve by making cycling easier.

So why did the government exclude a bike lane from the road upgrade along North Tce?

“If the imperative is to create a tram network,” he says “there are some things that are just not going to be possible”.

Like a right-turn into North Tce?

Weatherill insists it will make sense when people see the full network, including a city loop, which is yet to be announced. Along with plans for the old Royal Adelaide Hospital, which has “exciting possibilities of collaboration with the universities to create the jobs of the future” on site.

Urban planners have raised concerns that much of the CBD’s new-found vibrancy, the laneway-lined small bars, are elitist – and the Riverbank could be heading in the same direction. Weatherill again disagrees, insisting families will be able to enjoy the attractions. “Everyone, every now and then, can give themselves a treat,” he says.

The Riverbank will be a flashpoint on the city’s future planning if Steven Marshall becomes premier. He plans to dump McEvoy and the Riverbank Authority.

And, he points out, it was the Liberals who recognised the importance of the river first, making the “bold decision” to ensure the new Convention Centre extension opened in 2001 faced the water.

“Previously all buildings had their back to the Riverbank and this was something that was done under the Olsen government,” he says.

But there has been a slow movement ever since, says Marshall, who plans to get all the major Riverbank stakeholders together to “turbo charge” the redevelopment.

“That is why we have decided to scrap the Riverbank Authority, which is an expensive authority that hasn’t fully engaged the stakeholders along the riverbank,” he says.

More conventions and events are also on the agenda, including waterskiing championships along the River Torrens – which is also envisaged by the Lord Mayor.

High-rise residential development has been ruled out on the old Royal Adelaide Hospital site, and a mixed used site with a focus on jobs is planned. “It is the most exciting opportunity in any CBD in Australia,” Marshall says of the 7ha block next to the Botanic Garden and university precinct.

As he walks the city, Marshall says everywhere he looks he sees potential – but low economic and population growth are South Australians’ biggest concerns.

“When you look around Adelaide and see that the tallest building in the CBD was opened 30 years ago, it is a real indicator of how Adelaide has not grown over the past 30 years, and certainly over the past 16 years,” he says. “We want to grow the size of our economy, we want to keep people here in SA, especially young people.”

And he plans to do that by freeing up the economy – “lowering taxes, deregulating shop trading hours, deregulating generally to make it a more attractive place to invest”.

If elected, one of Marshall’s first priorities will be transforming the CBD’s heritage assets into usable spaces.

“Our architecture in SA is one of the things that really differentiates us from other places,” he says. “We want to see more rooftop bars. If you go along Rundle Mall often you’ve got the first floor and second floor utilised and there’s six floors completely vacant.

“It is demoralising for our young people to be walking past these great buildings, which if they were in Melbourne or Sydney would be transformed into great entertainment or retail spaces. And in SA they are just left derelict or boarded up. It has to change.”

But with a net loss to the state of more than 20 people a day, Marshall says when one venue does well, it is on the back of another venue doing lower sales.

“That is not sustainable,” he says. “Our priority is going to be to keep young people here.” And he also plans to attract more, by increasing the inflow of international students to Adelaide.

“SA now has 4.7 per cent of the nation’s international students and this has been steadily dropping. A Liberal Government will reopen trade offices, we have already announced four … and a major focus of those will be selling the opportunities to bring them into SA.”

Population growth is SA-Best leader Nick Xenophon’s vision and “bold plan” for Adelaide, as well as the city being a key part of the strategy to attract young people back to South Australia – and keep them here in the first place.

“Seventeen thousand (city resident population) is just embarrassing. There’s no reason why we couldn’t aim for 50,000 in the medium term,” Xenophon says.

“Could you imagine if we had 5-10,000 more residents within a five-minute walk of Rundle Mall? It would be alive at night, and there’s no reason why we can’t … so that involves working with the Feds in terms of co-operation on migration, our universities.”

Xenophon says apartments could be built above heritage shops in Rundle Mall and tripling the CBD population would take pressure off urban sprawl.

“Adelaide should be aiming for a doubling, a tripling of the population because I think it would give the area a huge buzz,” he says.

“We’ve got the park lands that can be a playground for families. At the moment it’s mainly students and singles, and couples without kids – there’s no reason why it can’t be more family-friendly.”

Xenophon says the park lands should be used as they were intended. “Not just as the lungs of the city, but to be a place where it becomes this recreational hub and it’s a backyard. You don’t need your own backyard because you’ve got this priceless asset.”

For him, the Labor Government has lacked vision, has “tired” policy ideas and has not consulted with key city stakeholders. “The tram extension and the bike lane is a prime example of that,” says Xenophon.

“I think it’s also an example of how (the) Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure has become so dysfunctional. It has been taken over by lawyers rather than the engineers that used to run it.

“The reason why we have that problem on North Tce is because there isn’t that consultation and collaboration.”

So should council be stripped of its powers for protecting Colonel Light’s vision for Adelaide and its moat, the park lands encompassing the River Torrens?

None of the leaders plan to cut the council’s powers further, and commend Haese for his leadership and welcoming of partnerships.

“I cannot see a case for change yet,” Weatherill says, rejecting McEvoy’s call.

“He’s actually been quite good in advocating for more sites to be developed,” says Xenophon of the lord mayor.

“They have to balance the interests of residents and developers but I think by and large they do a good job,” agrees Marshall.

Until after March 17, at least, Martin Haese can unlace those boxing gloves.

Good to see that all the leaders are advocating for more people living in the CBD. That puts my mind at ease a bit, as out CBD is just getting started with new buildings, more people and more activity.

[Waewick]

More people is the key. I truely hope Mr X or the Libs can actually pull off the turn around in our popukation growth.

That will be tough.

[timtam20292]

Who else is getting annoying survey calls to their phones about the upcoming election?

[monotonehell]

More people is the key. I truely hope Mr X or the Libs can actually pull off the turn around in our popukation growth.

That will be tough.

What policies have they revealed that will attempt to achieve this?

[Llessur2002]

What policies have they revealed that will attempt to achieve this?

Whilst we're on the topic of policies, I'm also still curious if anyone's got an answer to the below...

So which, exactly, of the policies announced by one or more of the conservative parties are going to give our state a chance to prosper economically then?

What in the long term is going to be more effective than the wholesale shift of our economy to high tech, modern industries - a shift which which Labor has already started and is gradually but noticeably building up momentum?

[rev]

More people is the key. I truely hope Mr X or the Libs can actually pull off the turn around in our popukation growth.

That will be tough.

What policies have they revealed that will attempt to achieve this?

Well we all know what the losers in the Greens would do, open the floodgates to illegal immigration and generally foreigners who don’t integrate and don’t assimilate. While Australians have to pick up the bill for the wage subsidies they have, among other hand outs courtesy of the Australian tax payer. The Greens would probably hand out free houses and cars to illegal immigrants before they actually do something to help Australians.

In reality if we want people to chose Adelaide as a home they need to have a reason to want to relocate here from interstate.
Industries and jobs.

The moon would have to physically turn blue before the Greens actually come up with real policies and not their socialist shit.