State Budget 2007

[crawf]

What do you think of this years state budget??


Solid but not that sexy
GREG KELTON, STATE POLITICAL REPORTER

June 07, 2007 03:30pm
Article from: The Advertiser

BILLIONS of dollars for infrastructure to "rebuild" South Australia have been set aside in today's State Budget, writes State Political Reporter GREG KELTON.

Treasurer Kevin Foley has also delivered $337 million in business tax cuts over four years, aimed at stimulating employment.

The average taxpayer misses out, though, with increases in fees and charges of around 4.2 per cent ,which means public transport fares, speeding fines, car registrations and thousands of other Government charges go up.

Despite this, the state is the third-lowest taxing state per head of population - $1917 a head - compared with the rate of $1831 in 2005-06.

Mr Foley admitted his sixth Budget was not “sexy” but asked to describe it, said it was “rebuilding SA”.

Centrepiece of the Budget building program is the $1.7 billion new Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital to replace the RAH by 2016.

The first funding for the giant health project - $213 million over four years - is included in this Budget.

There will be $157 million over four years for the relocation of the Adelaide rail yards and another $115 million to upgrade rail infrastructure and equipment.

Mr Foley also announced $31.4 million for the construction of a systems centre for the Air Warfare Destroyer contract and $28 million for a new tram bridge over South Rd.

Mr Foley said payroll tax would be cut from 5.5 per cent to 5.25 per cent from July 1 this year, with a further reduction to 5 per cent from July 1 next year.

However, there will be no cut to the threshold at which the tax comes in because it would mean about 250 companies would not benefit from the cuts. Mr Foley said the payroll tax cuts would provide relief to 6500 employers employing an estimated 370,000 South Australians.

Mr Foley is also intent on exercising fiscal restraint. He is proposing continuing Budget surpluses with a very modest $30 million in 2007-8 rising to $205 million in 2008-09 and reaching $278 million in 2010-11.

He has to keep the Budget in surplus to protect the state's AAA credit rating and he said today he was confident of a good reaction from ratings agency Standard & Poors.

“These surpluses will assist in funding major increases in infrastructure investment over the next four years,” Mr Foley said.

While there is little in the way of major spending on water security in this Budget, Mr Foley did not rule it out in the future. “Increasing water supply is quite possibly the next big infrastructure challenge,” he told reporters at his Budget press conference.

[Cruise]

Im rather happy, although i would have rathered more dough spent on The train network then just resleepering the noarlunga/belair lines. I expected the gawler line to be done as well.

[Will]

I think this was a positive budget for the state and for the future.

I was reading some of the comments posted on Adelaide Now and I am saddened to see that there are many people out there who still think we are living in the dark years of the State Bank. There are 2 types of debt. The debt created by this budget is 'good' debt because it is being used to fund items which will stimulate economic growth. You have to spend money to make money. The alternative favoured by many people, to not spend anything would only lead to stagnation.

[Norman]

I'm generally happy with it, especially the rail upgrades for Noarlunga (even though I don't use it anymore). The new hospital looks great too, the are will look much nicer than the dump of the railyards it was before.

Well done Foley and Rann

[stumpjumper]

Not a good budget for preservation of one of this state's major assets and one of its very attractive points of difference - its built and cultural heritage.

The 'heritage' component of the Department for Environment and Heritage had its budget reduced for the third consecutive year. It's the only department I can find which has suffered such reductions. At $2.5 million it is less than half the $5.7 million budget for the Botanic Gardens.

The budget for the entire department, including staff, heritage grants and everything else, is less than the budget for the Botanic Gardens.

I have heard, and I'm looking for corroboration, that Foley asked at the Clare regional meeting of State Cabinet "What if we ditched heritage completely? Could we take the flak?" I know for a fact that Foley is actively anti-heritage. Look at the case of Hart's Mill in Port Adelaide.

'It's a pile of shit,' said Foley to the suggestion that Hart's Mill, the world's tallest surviving timber framed brick building, South Australia's earliest place of fair, paid employment for indigenous people, could have a new life as apartments etc. 'It's in the way.'

So Hart's Mill, although featured on LMC's early brochures, will now be surrounded by concrete tilt-up apartments. Thanks Kevin.

Look at the fate more generally of built heritage down art the Port, or look at Foley's attitude to the Park Lands. Remember the footage of him strutting around giving the thumbs down at Victoria Park? He'd made up his mind. Now everyone had to follow. A certain female of Foley's (former) acquaintace, let's call her A, described him in the following terms: "Alpha male want, alpha male get. Now get out of my ____ way."

Next time someone compliments Mike Rann or Kevin Foley or Gail Gago (the uninformed and ineffectual Minister for Environment and Heritage) on some nice old pub, or speculates on the dollar value to tourism of Adelaide's stock of fine old restored buildings, I hope they have the honesty to answer:

'Nuthin to do with us. We are defunding heritage. The Treasurer hates it and we've put a Minister in charge of heritage who was a career nurse and has utterly no interest in or knowledge of conservation of the built environment (the natural environment is different - we need to keep spending on that to beat the Greens). We believe that Adelaide would be a much nicer city if all the old shit were replaced with generic architecture rubber stamped from anywhere else in the world.'

Edited to remove the word 'wankers'.

[Will]

^^^Nostalgia does not generate investment or jobs.

[urban]

Heritage does generate investment and jobs.

Studies have shown that for every dollar of assistance provided by Govt's for heritage, private investment matches it with 2. Creative societies find ways to adapt their heritage buildings and make them part of everyday life. In Europe you see McDonalds in centuries old buildings.

Heritage gives cities and towns depth encouraging tourists to linger and explore. Look at SA's major tourist spots they all have one thing in common - well preserved heritage. Look at the world's major tourist spots they all have one thing in common - well preserved heritage.

Heritage helps explain who we are, where we came from and what drives us. It attracts people to live in cities and towns.

House prices in councils which value their heritage are significantly higher than in those that don't. (Fact not opinion).

[Will]

Heritage does generate investment and jobs.

Studies have shown that for every dollar of assistance provided by Govt's for heritage, private investment matches it with 2. Creative societies find ways to adapt their heritage buildings and make them part of everyday life. In Europe you see McDonalds in centuries old buildings.

Heritage gives cities and towns depth encouraging tourists to linger and explore. Look at SA's major tourist spots they all have one thing in common - well preserved heritage. Look at the world's major tourist spots they all have one thing in common - well preserved heritage.

Heritage helps explain who we are, where we came from and what drives us. It attracts people to live in cities and towns.

House prices in councils which value their heritage are significantly higher than in those that don't. (Fact not opinion).

I should clarify my opinion. I have mentioned before that I value heritage buildings. I am not advocating destroying heritage buildings.

I take exception to Stumpjumpers extreme nostalgia. We should preserve real heritage buildings, like the GPO, but the notion of heritage should not be used for contaminated wasteland, abandoned tin sheds, carparks and toilet blocks.

The best example is the Holdfast Shores development. It has generated approximately 1000 jobs, increased neighbouring property values, generated investment in the area, but also figures show that more people are visiting and coming to live in Glenelg. Should this development have been cancelled because according to some local pensioners it 'destroyed the heritage and ammenity' of the area?

Or should the 20-22 Currie Street tower be cancelled because of the Arturos Taverna building?

[urban]

Holdfast shores did not have heritage issues.

It's issues were
- use of public land for private use;
- environmental damage to the beach;
- access between public reserve and beach blocked
- Bland design;
- poor connection between active frontages and pedestrian paths.

The project would have actually worked better if it had been constructed on private land on the hills side of the reserve.

My problem with the development of the contaminated wasteland is not that something is happening it's that what is happening is 2nd rate. Elsewhere on this site someone asked what it was that Adelaide was missing to give it the X-factor. The pride and self assurance required to demand 1st rate development for our built environment is the only thing this city is missing. The drive to complete projects to a high level is missing. We either take a 1st rate site and put a 2nd rate building on it or we put a 1st rate building in a 2nd rate site:
- National wine centre good building bad site;
- Rainforest conservatory ditto;
- Cycling centre ditto;
- UniSA Mawson Lakes Ditto;
- Holdfast shores bad buildings bad site;
- Convention Centre good building, good site but wrong building for that site;
- Port Adelaide good site some bad buildings.

[Will]

Holdfast shores did not have heritage issues.

It's issues were
- use of public land for private use;
- environmental damage to the beach;
- access between public reserve and beach blocked
- Bland design;
- poor connection between active frontages and pedestrian paths.

The project would have actually worked better if it had been constructed on private land on the hills side of the reserve.

My problem with the development of the contaminated wasteland is not that something is happening it's that what is happening is 2nd rate. Elsewhere on this site someone asked what it was that Adelaide was missing to give it the X-factor. The pride and self assurance required to demand 1st rate development for our built environment is the only thing this city is missing. The drive to complete projects to a high level is missing. We either take a 1st rate site and put a 2nd rate building on it or we put a 1st rate building in a 2nd rate site:
- National wine centre good building bad site;
- Rainforest conservatory ditto;
- Cycling centre ditto;
- UniSA Mawson Lakes Ditto;
- Holdfast shores bad buildings bad site;
- Convention Centre good building, good site but wrong building for that site;
- Port Adelaide good site some bad buildings.

But then this becomes a debate based on aesthetics. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me the Holdfast Shores development especially the Marina Pier building are very attractive. But I respect if you find them ugly or bland.

My point is that a city obssessed with the past has no future. We should preserve what is relevant from the past, but not let the past dictate or block the future. A city is not a static entity, it is always evolving. Maybe we are creating the heritage buildings of tomorrow?

[jimmy_2486]

You are spot on there will....how can a city get anywhere when we cant expand our crappy 100+ year old useless buildings into something useful. Even if it means converting them into something useful I reckon that would be a good alternative as well.

[Cruise]

Im all for keeping our heritage buildings but if we do so look after the bloody things!!! i mean go for a walk through Port Adelaide for christ sake. They may aswell heritage list the pigeon shit its been there so long!!!

[urban]

A project with the budget and location of Holdfast Shores should have won numerous state and possibly national architecture awards.

How many awards did it pick up?

The same mistakes happen over and over, good opportunities keep getting 1/2 hearted efforts. The difference between Melbourne and Adelaide over the last 15 years has been they used opportunities such as Holdfast Shores to create iconic buildings that the rest of the country are jealous of, while ours are functionally adequate.

jimmy you are exactly right the 100+ year old buildings should be added onto and made into something useful but too few developers can be bothered with designs that require thought. Even in Hobart they are constructing nationally recognised iconic additions to warehouses such as IXL.

Sydney managed to create a tourist attraction out of a brick pit.

[jimmy_2486]

A project with the budget and location of Holdfast Shores should have won numerous state and possibly national architecture awards.

How many awards did it pick up?

The same mistakes happen over and over, good opportunities keep getting 1/2 hearted efforts. The difference between Melbourne and Adelaide over the last 15 years has been they used opportunities such as Holdfast Shores to create iconic buildings that the rest of the country are jealous of, while ours are functionally adequate.

jimmy you are exactly right the 100+ year old buildings should be added onto and made into something useful but too few developers can be bothered with designs that require thought. Even in Hobart they are constructing nationally recognised iconic additions to warehouses such as IXL.

Sydney managed to create a tourist attraction out of a brick pit.

Well I've been to birkenhead point outlet shopping center in Sydney and i was very impressed in how they converted this huge crappy Pt Adelaide style building into a huge shopping outlet store that looked very impressive on the inside.
That could had been heritage just like alot of Pt Adelaides buildings!

Then again I could drop a turd in Sydney's Circular Quay and somehow it will become a international tourist destination!!!

[urban]

Manuka Markets in Canberra have also turned out well.