A law and policy briefing paper authored by a group of senior Adelaide University academics says the SA Labor government created legislation to ‘rubberstamp’ a current controversial Park Lands redevelopment project without any planning assessment.
It also quietly transferred the land into ‘fee-simple’ ownership controlled by the state Government, ahead of clearing 400 trees in May 2026 with no public consultation.
The seven authors of the law and policy brief represent law, architecture, ssustainable design, and archaeology disciplines.
They say the 2025 North Adelaide Public Golf Course Act, passed in July 2025, meant that the State Planning Commission had to grant planning consent for this project, whatever it looked like.
The Act declared the whole project to be classified as development that is “deemed-to-satisfy” the Planning and Design Code. But, as the authors point out, it did so without specifying any criteria with which the project had to comply, and design plans were only released six months after the NAPGC Act was passed.
The brief, published in August, says the effect of the Act was to override existing rights of public participation and scrutiny of the proposal against several criteria, including whether it
protected, enhanced and improved public access to areas of special landscape character or cultural significance;
recognised the Park Lands national heritage values; and
was sited and designed to protect and improve biodiversity.
Mat Monti, President of the Adelaide Park Lands Association said,
“Declaring the golf course redevelopment to be a ‘deemed to satisfy’ development is a legal fiction designed to bypass assessment”.
“Development of the golf course should have been open to public and community scrutiny. Removing the right to make submissions led to widespread protest and undermined the democratic process.”
Mat Monti said the Association was not claiming the Government had announced plans to sell the land, but the change to fee-simple tenure warranted clear safeguards.
“This is a major change in the legal status of land that generations of South Australians have understood to be protected public Park Lands. The Government must explain why it was necessary to designate the land ‘fee simple’ and what safeguards prevent future sale, privatisation or permanent alienation.”
“Nobody is saying there is a ‘For Sale’ sign going up tomorrow. But once the legal status of Park Lands is changed, South Australians are entitled to ask why and to demand cast-iron protection against future sale or privatisation.”
“The Park Lands should never become a land bank for governments of the day,” Mat Monti said.
The full paper can be viewed at the Biodiversity Council website at
