Barbara Pocock (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did enjoy that contribution.

I rise to talk about a significant new building in South Australia: South Australia's first skyscraper, 38 storeys high, which is planned to be built a few metres from our South Australian parliament, on our precious public parklands in our city. It's called Walker tower 2. It's the child of a rich-listed property developer, Walker Corporation, a multibillion-dollar enterprise. It is a huge building of 38 storeys, alongside Walker tower 1, which is a mere 28 storeys. Approval of the first Walker tower was on the basis that it was offset and set back from Parliament House, that it didn't obscure the view of our beautiful parliament building from the north and that it didn't disrupt the sight-lines of this very important South Australian monument, and with the agreement that only three storeys would be built next door to Walker tower 1—the place where we now see a proposal for a building of 38 storeys.

On 11 June this year, the South Australian State Planning Commission assessment panel granted planning consent for this building. Since then, over 125 eminent South Australians and many others—and this group included former premier the Hon. Reverend Dr Lynn Arnold AO, former president of the Legislative Council the Hon. Anne Levy AO and so many others—have signed an open letter calling on the Premier and the South Australian parliament to stop the construction of Walker Tower 2 to protect our Festival Plaza as open civic space and retain it as public land.

The construction of Walker Tower 2 would incur a major loss of open civic space and negatively impact really vital heritage values of our Parliament House complex and our beautiful Adelaide parklands. These are two of South Australia's National Heritage listings. We have nine, but these are two of our National Heritage listings. If you've visited South Australia, you will have admired the beautiful green spaces, internationally famous, like Central Park in New York, for being the lungs of our city, beautifully planned by Colonel Light and a prized aspect of living in our city. You will also, I hope, have strolled down the boulevard of North Terrace, a cultural precinct of enormous historical significance in our city. These are the two heritage sites, nationally listed, which are at risk of serious compromise by this building proposal.

As my colleague in South Australia's upper house Mr Rob Simms said in the South Australian parliament yesterday, the South Australian government should intervene to prevent the construction of Walker Tower 2, and so should the federal government, using its EPBC powers to call in this project, assess its heritage impact and make a full and open assessment, with the consultation of South Australians, about its impact on our heritage. So many South Australians care about the character and heritage of our city, and they've contacted me and protested at what is proposed for this site—many planners, architects, ordinary citizens, trade unionists and people in our churches. I want to especially acknowledge Robert Farnan, convener of the Save Festival Plaza Alliance, and Elizabeth Vines, architect, who have kept me informed about what's going on at Walker Corporation 2.

The skyscraper that's being proposed will overshadow North Terrace and our Parliament House and obscure the view for the public. It'll prevent the public from being able to enjoy Festival Plaza, which is iconic civil space. This 160-metre-tall skyscraper will be the tallest commercial building in Adelaide, and it'll include commercial office space on most of its floors. The South Australian planning minister has said that the plaza will be a vibrant space once the tower is finished, but just how many office workers will be there isn't clear. We don't need another 38 storeys of commercial space in South Australia, with a 20 per cent occupancy for commercial space at present. So why are we building yet another enormous office tower when what we really need in our city, and in every other city and regional town in our country, is housing for citizens who can't afford a house and can't get a rental, leading to increasing rates of homelessness?

This skyscraper risks turning one of Adelaide's most iconic public spaces into just another soulless commercial precinct, wrecking two critical National Heritage sites. There are lots of other spots where you can put very tall buildings. I'm not opposed to tall buildings, but they should be in our CBD, not set on our beautiful river and compromising our beautiful parklands. You don't put a skyscraper right next to Parliament House. Imagine if we did it here in the Parliamentary Triangle. It's like putting a commercial skyscraper right next to the Opera House or plonking one down in the middle of Federation Square. Parliaments internationally don't put 38-storey buildings next to their public parliament houses. No-one does that, especially where it compromises historic heritage values.

What we see here in this building is a massive change in the use of space, and—wait for it—it is charging the Walker Corporation, a multibillion-dollar enterprise, a ground lease of just $1 per year for 100 years. We're turning over, for commercial space, a prime civic spot, massively significant in heritage terms, to a multibillion-dollar operation which will lease it for commercial purposes. If this goes ahead, South Australians are going to have two giant towers overshadowing the people's place, the people's house, reminding all Australians and South Australians who runs the show and robbing us of our beautiful civic space and national heritage. It's outrageous that Walker Corporation was granted exclusive use of this parkland site for their first tower. It is even more outrageous that we see a second one, which was initially agreed to be only three storeys high, now a towering 38-storey monstrosity.

The South Australian government's own heritage agency, Heritage SA, has raised really significant issues about the impact of this tower on our heritage, and many South Australians are protesting its shape and impact. We know that the South Australian code amendment which changed the zoning law was rushed through without proper consultation, walking all over the government's own community engagement commitments or charter without a proper planning process. There has not been a proper consultation with the citizens of our state. This is such a significant project which has not had the public attention and conversation it deserves.

There is also a role here for the federal government through the EPBC Act. Minister Watt has the powers to call in this project under the provisions of this act. The act states that a corporation must not take an action that will have a significant impact on the national heritage values of a national heritage place. The guidelines in that act state that, if an action is adjacent to or within important sight lines and if it has a significant impact, the proponent must not take the action without prior approval from the minister. Yet, here in South Australia, we have the cement foundations already poured for this building without proper consideration of the heritage compromises that are implicit in this project.

The EPBC Act gives the powers for rigorous assessment, including a 10-day public consultation period should the minister decide to call it in. We, South Australians say, to Minister Watt: call this project in. We want a say about what this means, and we want a proper heritage assessment. We have to see a full assessment of these impacts. We want to see the legislative protections for urban national heritage places. Otherwise, our EPBC Act and the notion of heritage listing is meaningless. Other factors, like financial deals, politics, pressure for development, jobs, bureaucracy—all of these, in this example, are trumping the voice, views and heritage of South Australians. We must protect our significant values and our significant heritage. It's time to listen to South Australians, citizens, not billionaire developers. Minister Watt has the power to do this. South Australians want to see the EPBC powers used to enable proper consultation, and we cannot sacrifice the brilliant historical heritage values of our state to corporate interests and commercial deals which don't stack up.