COMPULSORY PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS
The Hon. J.A. DARLEY ( 16:28 ): I move:
1. That a s elect c ommittee of the Legislative Council be established to
inquire into matters related to the compulsory acquisition of properties as part of the s
tate g overnment’s north-s outh corridor upgrade, including:
(a) c urrent acquisition policies and procedures of the
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) including a
comparison of the effectiveness of these policies compared to past practices of
DPTI and the Rehousing Committee;
(b) t he role of the Crown Solicitor’s Office in the acquisition process;
(c) t he effect the compulsory acquisition process has
had on dispossessed owners, including:
(i) their ability to purchase another property;
(ii) changes to personal, financial and psychological circumstances;
(d) DPTI’s requirement to negotiate, in good faith, with dispossessed owners;
(e) t he fairness of compensation offers made to dispossessed owners;
(f) t he use and relevance of market value when considering compensation;
(g) v aluation practices and methodology used in determining compensation;
(h) t he ability for dispossessed owners to exercise their legal rights; and
(i) a ny other related matters.
2. That s tanding order 389 be so far suspended as to enable the C
hairperson of the c ommittee to have a deliberative vote only.
3. That this c ouncil permits the s elect c ommittee to authorise the
disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the c
ommittee prior to such evidence being presented to the c ouncil.
4. That standing order 396 be suspended to enable strangers to be
admitted when the s elect c ommittee is examining witnesses unless the c ommittee
otherwise resolves, but they shall be excluded when the c ommittee is deliberating.
This motion is the result of my being contacted by a number of constituents who have either had
their properties compulsorily acquired or, even more disturbingly, have had their properties
earmarked for acquisition without further word as part of the government's Torrens to Torrens
project. In some of these instances I have advocated for constituents and assisted them in their
dealings with the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. I have to say at the outset
that the process has been nothing short of frustrating, even for me.
During my time as CEO of the lands department some 30 years ago, and more recently as the
Valuer-General, I oversaw the compulsory acquisition of many properties for projects, including
the Adelaide Entertainment Centre, and in all of these cases there was an emphasis on treating
dispossessed owners respectfully and acknowledging the sensitivities of the fact that we were,
effectively, taking their home from them, albeit with compensation. I cannot say that my recent
experience with these constituents has reflected these same sorts of attitudes. Instead,
constituents have come to me complaining of intimidation, coercion, bullying and a general sense
of helplessness. For all of the people I have encountered it certainly has been a case of David
being defeated by Goliath.
The government has indicated that over 100 properties have been acquired 'amicably'. I have not
encountered one person who has described their experience with the acquisition process, or their
outcome, as 'amicable'. I have met with people who have held their property freehold for over a
decade, only to be faced with the unexpected prospect of entering into a new mortgage in order to
place themselves in a similar position prior to the acquisition—and those are the lucky ones. The
unlucky ones were given such meagre compensation for their properties that they were forced into
either inferior properties or inferior locations.
Some of the people I talked to are aged well into their 70s and 80s, and simply were not in a
position to finance a new loan, so at a time in their lives when they should be enjoying the fruits of
their labour and their retirement they have instead found themselves in a stressful financial
situation. There has been little or no regard for the fact that in some cases these people have lived
in their family homes for 20 or 30, or even 50, years. There has been even less regard for their
mental health and the toll this process has taken on them personally.
It is heartbreaking to meet with a constituent and watch them decline mentally, emotionally and,
in some cases, physically over the course of the acquisition process. These people have not asked
to be in this situation, nor have they tried to stand in the way of progress. They have simply asked
that they be treated fairly and within the spirit of the legislation that enables the government to
acquire their family homes.
In fairness, under the previous minister, the acquisition process appeared to be more generous,
and there was certainly a greater understanding of the sensitivities of forcibly taking a person's
home. In more recent times, however, that approach has simply gone out the window. I do not
know what has changed, but clearly the acquisition process is not working any longer and the
department has moved so far away from the spirit of the legislation that it warrants review.
The terms of reference that I have proposed (and I thank the opposition for their support on this
issue) highlight those areas that require scrutiny. Most importantly, the committee will provide
dispossessed owners with an avenue to detail their experiences with the acquisition process. This
is not the first and it will not be the last time that people find themselves being dispossessed of
their homes. We need to ensure that the acquisition process is fair and reasonable for all parties
involved. With that, I commend the motion to the house.
Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.