Call to Action

The Malinauskas government’s proposal to move the LIV golf tournament to the public golf course in the north parklands will:

  • be environmental carnage; thousands of trees are likely to be cut down, with the loss of the important ecological benefits they provide
  • mean more buildings and more parking areas on green space and less parkland available for people
  • hurt and harm many people within the Indigenous community
  • create a dangerous precedent, allowing the government to simply take over any land they want. Our parklands will not be safe
  • undermine Adelaide’s iconic asset of a belt of urban parklands that has supported city thriving for centuries. 

The Parklands Association is conducting an effective and targeted campaign against the government’s plans. For more information, visithttps://www.adelaide-parklands.asn.au/.

Take a tour of the parklands to gain a greater understanding of what we stand to lose: https://events.humanitix.com/host/adel_park_lands.

To express your concern or seek answers, contact your MP (see below for email addresses):

MP**PartyElectorateEmail Address
Sarah ANDREWSALPGibsongibson@parliament.sa.gov.au
David BASHAMLIBFinnissfinniss@parliament.sa.gov.au
Jack BATTYLIBBraggbragg@parliament.sa.gov.au
Zoe BETTISONALPRamsayramsay@parliament.sa.gov.au
Leon BIGNALLALPMawsonmawson@parliament.sa.gov.au
Blair BOYERALPWrightwright@parliament.sa.gov.au
Geoff BROCKINDStuartstuart@parliament.sa.gov.au
Michael BROWNALPFloreyflorey@parliament.sa.gov.au
Nick CHAMPIONALPTaylortaylor@parliament.sa.gov.au
Nadia CLANCYALPElderelder@parliament.sa.gov.au
Susan CLOSEALPPort Adelaideportadelaide@parliament.sa.gov.au
Nat COOKALPHurtle Valehurtlevale@parliament.sa.gov.au
Matt COWDREYLIBColtoncolton@parliament.sa.gov.au
Dan CREGANINDKavelkavel@parliament.sa.gov.au
Alex DIGHTONALPBlackblack@parliament.sa.gov.au
Fraser ELLISLIBNarungganarungga@parliament.sa.gov.au
John GARDNERLIBMorialtamorialta@parliament.sa.gov.au
Katrine HILDYARDALPReynellreynell@parliament.sa.gov.au
Lucy HOODALPAdelaideadelaide@parliament.sa.gov.au
Eddie HUGHESALPGilesgiles@parliament.sa.gov.au
Ashton HURNLIBSchubertschubert@parliament.sa.gov.au
Catherine HUTCHESSONALPWaitewaite@parliament.sa.gov.au
Tom KOUTSANTONISALPWest Torrenswesttorrens@parliament.sa.gov.au
Philip McBRIDEINDMackillopmackillop@parliament.sa.gov.au
Peter MALINAUSKASALPCroydoncroydon@parliament.sa.gov.au
Andrea MICHAELSALPEnfieldenfield@parliament.sa.gov.au
Stephen MULLIGHANALPLeelee@parliament.sa.gov.au
Cressida O’HANLONALPDunstandunstan@parliament.sa.gov.au
Lee OLDENWALDER ALPElizabethelizabeth@parliament.sa.gov.au
Stephen PATTERSONLIBMorphettmorphett@parliament.sa.gov.au
Rhiannon PEARCEALPKIngking@parliament.sa.gov.au
Adrian PEDERICKLIBHammondhammond@parliament.sa.gov.au
Tony PICCOLOALPLightlight@parliament.sa.gov.au
Chris PICTONALPKaurnakaurna@parliament.sa.gov.au
David PISONILIBUnleyunley@parliament.sa.gov.au
Penny PRATTLIBFromefrome@parliament.sa.gov.au
Olivia SAVVAALP Newlandnewland@parliament.sa.gov.au
Jayne STINSONALPBadcoebadcoe@parliament.sa.gov.au
John FULLBROOKALPPlayfordplayford@parliament.sa.gov.au
Vincent TARZIALIBHartleyhartley@parliament.sa.gov.au
Josh TEAGUELIBHeysenheysen@parliament.sa.gov.au
Sam TELFERLIBFlindersflinders@parliament.sa.gov.au
Erin THOMPSONALPDavenportdavenport@parliament.sa.gov.au
Tim WHETSTONELIBChaffeychaffey@parliament.sa.gov.au
Joe SZAKACSALPCheltenhamcheltenham@parliament.sa.gov.au
Dana WORTLEYALPTorrenstorrens@parliament.sa.gov.au

**With the recent resignation of the previous sitting member, Mt Gambier will not have a sitting member until after the 2026 state election. We suggest you contact the Premier (Peter Malinauskas) or the environment minister (Lucy Hood).

The seat of Adelaide and the 2026 state election….. Ethical Events asks some questions

The proposed move of the LIV golf tournament to the course in the north parklands highlights three central concerns of Ethical Events: environmental harm; governance that lacks sufficient transparency and accountability; and inadequate attention to the protection of human rights. Ethical Events therefore asked the declared candidates ( as at14th November 2025) for the Adelaide electorate questions that centre on these three issues. Julian Amato (Liberal); Bronte Colmer (Greens); Lucy Hood (Labor) and Keiran Snape (Independent) were asked to respond to these questions (see list below). The candidates were informed that their responses would be reproduced verbatim on the Ethical Events website:

  • What is your response to the opposition from some Indigenous Australians to what they regard as a threat to Country and to heritage (both Aboriginal and colonial heritages) from changes to existing parkland to accommodate LIV golf?
  • What is your response to concerns about the adequacy of consultation with the Indigenous community with respect to this takeover of parklands, both before the legislation was passed and since that time?
  • What is your response to the concerns about potential tree, and biodiversity, loss in the north parklands, including significant and regulated trees, as a result of the planned changes?
  • What is your response to concerns that this establishes a precedent for further loss of parkland?
  • What is your response to concern about the government’s legislative takeover of a slab of the north parklands?
  • What is your response to unease that this establishes a precedent for government acquisition of land or property without comprehensive consultation?

All candidates were asked to provide answers to these questions by December 1st 2025. No response was received from Julian Amato, Bronte Colmer or Lucy Hood. The Independent candidate, Keiran Snape, did respond and his answers are reproduced (verbatim) below.  A copy of the letter of invitation can be found here.

Responses from Kieran Snape:

What is your response to the opposition from some Indigenous Australians to what they regard as a threat to Country and to heritage (both Aboriginal and colonial heritages) from changes to existing parkland to accommodate LIV golf?

This opposition is completely understandable, and I share the concerns of these groups. The threat that these changes pose to significant Aboriginal cultural sites is incredibly worrying.

What is your response to concerns about the adequacy of consultation with the Indigenous community with respect to this takeover of parklands, both before the legislation was passed and since that time?

It seems that very little consultation was completed prior to the passing of this legislation. The consultation since has been, in my opinion tokenistic, and inaccessible to the broader Kaurna community.

What is your response to the concerns about potential tree, and biodiversity, loss in the north parklands, including significant and regulated trees, as a result of the planned changes?

The potential impact to the ecosystem is completely at odds with the government’s stance on climate and environment. A well-respected golf course designer has hypothesised that the minimum number of trees lost would be 5,000. This is completely unacceptable and will undoubtedly result in loss of habitat and biodiversity in the area.

What is your response to concerns that this establishes a precedent for further loss of parkland?


What is your response to concern about the government’s legislative takeover of a slab of the north parklands?


What is your response to unease that this establishes a precedent for government acquisition of land or property without comprehensive consultation?

These actions from the state government have set a precedent that there is opportunity for the Park Lands to no longer be maintained in accordance with Light’s vision. More importantly, it is testing the public reception to this kind of takeover. Without significant backlash, there is very little to stop legislation of this kind being pushed through again. The Labor government will win a majority at the next election. Without a strong opposition in parliament, they will be able to continue to do as they wish. Unfortunately, it is all too common for public consultation to be disregarded in matters of development. I would like to see impacted communities adequately consulted, with a commitment to take any feedback on board and attempt to adapt projects in line with the needs of the community.

On Humpty Dumpty and LIV Golf

Aren’t words funny things? Simple words can, it seems, mean the opposite of what they actually …  well … mean.  Premier Malinauskas is apparently a devotee of the Humpty Dumpty school of language: “When I use a word,” says Humpty “it means just what I choose it to mean….”. 

Who knew ‘investment’ means chopping down trees?

Our Premier proudly announced that moving LIV golf from Grange to North Adelaide entails “investment” in Adelaide’s famed and treasured parklands. What does this investment mean? The loss of perhaps 600 trees and the eviction of over 100 species that currently make their home in the ‘investment’ site.  New buildings will be constructed, but the government can’t say how many, or how big they will be.  Expanded  parking facilities  will also pave over more green space. A large amount of existing parkland will be fenced off from the public. As yet, how much and how long it remains in place, remains unknown, at least to the public. Can the parklands withstand this ‘investment’? Significant tree and biodiversity loss, less green space and more built infrastructure suggest parkland destruction, rather than investment. 

Is War Memorial Drive safe?  Or the River Torrens precinct? A well-placed and credible local journalist, Mike Smithson, is putting his money on LIV’s ‘colossus clubrooms’ being on the tennis courts, across from Adelaide Oval on  War Memorial Drive, or on the site of the now defunct Red Ochre and River Café. If this prophecy is correct, it will see the Premier’s investment entail Adelaide’s citizens having less access to their parklands. The Planning Minister, Nick Champion,  conceded that the government’s new legislation allowed for potential closure of War Memorial Drive, but said the government had ‘no desire’ to do this. The legislation would, however, be implemented if the government needs the flexibility to close the road during building. This sounds like a Humpty Dumpty “No desire” — meaning there could be closure of War Memorial Drive and disruption to the River Torrens. 

Does a bigger and better LIV mean a more transparent and accountable one?

The government is fond of grandstanding about the financial benefit of LIV Golf for the state’s economy; a yield of $81 million from the last tournament, we are told. But what we are not told, despite repeated requests, is where that money goes. Shouldn’t such a great success be accompanied by a detailed statement about how, and by how much, South Australians benefitted? 

Similarly, the government remains tight-lipped on how much it spends on hosting LIV. Ultimately, taxpayers help fund this Saudi tournament. Yet we are not told how much of our money is spent. Finally, the North Adelaide course, loved and used by generations of South Australians, is to be remodelled. The redesign will be done by Greg Norman. The government clearly feels it has pulled off a coup by having the great white shark overseeing the devouring of approximately 20% of the north parklands. We can assume it won’t be cheap, but that information is not being shared with the public. Apparently, we don’t have the right to know. 

Speaking of coups, the government has staged another one. Without consultation or negotiation, the government rushed through legislation removing the Adelaide City Council’s long-term control of a large slab of the parklands in another blow to transparency and accountability.

In the end, all the public are told is that LIV is good for them. An assertion we have to take on faith, it seems.  

And, about human rights…..

Despite the best attempt of some apologists to spruik improvements, human rights abuses continue in Saudi Arabia. The human rights of migrant workers, women and dissidents remain curtailed and precarious. No amount of sportswashing will erase this inconvenient truth. 

A human rights issue is unfolding closer to home. The lack of adequate and appropriate consultation about the fate of the parklands, which are significant to Kaurna people, sits oddly with the is government’s insistence that it acknowledges the rights of First Australians to have a say over what happens to areas of importance to them. 

The LIV footprint over the Adelaide parklands is significant, including an extensive overlap with recognised Kaurna sites under the SA Aboriginal Heritage Act. See the photos attached.

Under the First Nations Voice Act 2023 (“the Act”), South Australia has a legislated First Nations Voice to both the Parliament and the Government. Section 28 (1)(c) of the Act empowers the State First Nations Voice to advise the SA Parliament and the SA Government on ‘matters of interest to First Nations people’. Consultation with First Nations community members prior to this advice is embedded in the Act. 

The takeover by the State Government of a large parcel of Adelaide Parklands, previously managed by the Adelaide City Council, an area designated as Kaurna Heritage sites under the Aboriginal Heritage Act, would be a matter of interest to First Nations people. Yet the government rushed legislation through Parliament (in less than a day), meaning there was no opportunity for the State First Nations Voice to advise the government on the proposed legislation. 

After this legislation was passed, a month long YourSAy SA online consultation commenced under the Aboriginal Heritage Act. A meeting for Aboriginal people was scheduled for mid July in a Mawson Lakes venue. Questions remain about the efficacy of this consultation process and whether it is culturally appropriate. We cannot answer those questions. Nevertheless, we note the consultation process is a short one, at arms lengths from the Kaurna community and undertaken after Parliament passed government-initiated, game-changing legislation. 

Image taken from SA Government consultation on the North Adelaide Golf Course.
Image taken from SA Government consultation on the North Adelaide Golf Course.

Adelaide’s Parklands – discussion with candidate Keiran Snape

This episode of the Adelaide Chronicles Podcast features a discussion with current Adelaide City Councillor and candidate for the upcoming South Australian election Keiran Snape.

Adelaide Chronicles Podcast – Keiran Snape

Keiran is an Adelaide City Councillor and he has long opposed LIV, including on Human Rights grounds. 

When the announcement was made to move LIV to the North Adelaide Parklands, a move which will be environmentally devastating and interfere with indigenous heritage sites, Keiran increased his advocacy on this issue. Keiran also launched his campaign as an independent candidate for the State seat of Adelaide. 

The irresistible advance of sportswashing?

Australians woke on Wednesday morning to the news that the Saudi backed LIV tour had merged with America’s Professional Golf Association (PGA) and DP, the European Golf Tour. The back room deals of obscure golfing organizations might appear irrelevant, but they are not. This is a blow to human rights across the globe.  All three golf tours (LIV, PGA and DP) will form a new organizational entity to run men’s golf and it will largely be underpinned by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF). The PIF may be the world’s premier sportswashing body and it has scored a marketing coup with this amalgamation. It now has a large degree of control over the entire sport of men’s golf.  Given that almost every golf tournament of consequence will be in large part funded by the Saudis, every tournament will be an exercise in sportswashing, which has now gone global.  Every men’s tournament, by definition, will be an unethical event. 

According to one report, what form the LIV tour will take in 2024 is now unclear (https://www.smh.com.au/sport/golf/pga-and-european-tours-in-shock-merger-with-saudi-backed-liv-20230607-p5dekc.html). This raises some interesting questions for Premier Malinauskas. After spending money to attract the LIV tour to Adelaide (we don’t know how much, because the government refuses to tell us), will the event go ahead in 2024? If it does proceed, will it still attract top-tier golfers now that PGA and DP tournaments are open to them? A trip down under in the northern hemisphere spring may be looking less appealing than it did before Wednesday’s announcement. Perhaps the most compelling question for the Premier, given the uncertainty that now hangs over the LIV tour, was the reputational damage to South Australia worth it? 

The other unpalatable implication of the almost wholesale Saudi takeover of golf is, what sport is next? The answer is unclear, but it should concern all of us because no sport can now be considered safe from the sportswashing march of the Saudis. Craig Foster sums up the dangers:

Saudi Arabia taking over much of global professional sport and in so doing, co-opting influential sporting bodies & much of their fanbases as we’ve seen with @NUFC who quickly become defenders of human rights abuse & promoters of the regime.

Let’s become an Ethical Festival State. 

Ethical Events and Festivals Forum – 19 April 2023

South Australia has a proud history of Festivals. We are known as the Festival State. Let’s become an Ethical Festival State. 

Firstly I would like to say that we do not take it for granted that we are able to speak freely and meet here today – in Human Rights language we have freedom of speech and freedom of association. 

Welcome to Semaphore, home of the Semaphore Kite Festival. Last weekend thousands of people flocked here over three days to a community led and driven event supported by council.

Today we are talking about ethical events and festivals. 

So how did we get here ?

This Forum has been conceived and organised by a small group of Le Fevre Peninsula local citizens, in response to the LIV golf tournament to be held from Friday at the Grange Golf Club. LIV is Latin for 54, there are 54 holes in the LIV golf tournament – PGA events have 72 holes. It’s a male only tournament. In addition to the fewer holes played, other differences in the LIV tournament include that it’s played over 3 days instead of 4, it features teams rather than individual players, there is no cut so all players play the full 3 days and players who have joined up are guaranteed huge sums of money. 

LIV is funded by the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia to the tune of $3 billion USD, with the concept developed by Greg Norman. LIV was not an event looking for sponsorship. LIV was conceived to be a vehicle to sports wash the Saudi regime. 

After learning of the decision that South Australia was to host the LIV tournament, the first in the Southern Hemisphere – a first we would rather not have – I considered how to respond. Letters were written to the Premier, The Advertiser, Events SA and the Grange Golf Club. To no avail. Others including Jane Edwards were doing the same. A local  suggested I talk with Georgia Heath, who she described as a young community driven woman who opposed LIV ‘who lived just around the corner’ ! The three of us met at a local coffee shop, and discussed how to approach what we all saw as concerning developments in our state. We questioned the ethics of partnering with the Saudi regime. We were concerned about lack of transparency and accountability. 

So how to respond ? There were a range of options to consider – continuing with letter writing, protest actions, civil disobedience, paid media campaigns, joining the Golf Club and making representations internally, could events could be rated akin to the Easter egg rating system for ethically sourced chocolate ? getting on local media and other ideas to increase awareness. Or a combination of these options. 

It was decided to hold this Forum to discuss the concept of ethical events and festivals more generally. As the LIV tournament was the catalyst, we decided to hold the forum two days before the LIV tournament starts. Raising awareness at a time when there was a focus on the event, and a world wide focus on Adelaide. The idea of developing a framework evolved.

While we came with a wide range of skills and experiences, we  thought a forum would widen the pool of people who could contribute. The idea was that if we drew together a group of people from a wide range of backgrounds, we could distil just what makes a festival or event ethical and what could be included in a draft framework. So your presence here today is vital to the process. 

Ethics is from the Greek word ethos meaning ‘way of living’. How do we, as a society, want to live? With the freedoms we have, and as citizens, we can influence how decisions are made in our society. 

Festivals and events may be unethical due to their funding or sponsorship, in the way they are run or a combination of both. 

The extent of SA tax payers’ money going towards the hosting of LIV has started to be revealed. InDaily published on Friday that Events SA have allocated $840,000, yes way more than ¾ million, for marketing, to ‘raise awareness’ about LIV. I have no doubt you could think of better ways to spend that sum! We have heard anecdotally today that the LIV dinner will cost $1 million. Who is I paying for that ? why such an extravagant affair ? who gets that money ? We are still to learn how much this event will be costing tax payers, and how much will be covered by the Saudis. Either way it’s not acceptable. This is sportswashing. As you would have seen in Jane’s comprehensive background paper, Sportswashing is an attempt by states or corporations to deflect attention from human rights abuses they have perpetrated, by sponsoring or hosting sports events. The headlines focus on the celebrities, not the ethical issues. Green washing is the same. 

We do not suggest a Forum and an ethical framework is the only response to events or festivals that breach human rights, or are in other ways considered to be unethical. We think that a framework is but one part of the puzzle, a jigsaw piece that helps complete the picture. An ethical framework will be a guide – for example if a Council was considering whether to hold a sporting tournament funded by a particular sponsor or regime, they could look at the framework as a guide. 

I have been trying to fathom why would Events SA think that the LIV tournament fits within the program of events to be hosted by SA in 2023. We have events and festivals – arts and sports – with an international flavour.  Through July and August there will be many nations competing at Hindmarsh Stadium in the FIFA Women’s world cup. If it was decided that we needed another international sporting event as part of 2023 programming, surely there was another sporting event that could be hosted that did not risk reputational harm to our State. 

While the LIV event has come with guaranteed financial backing and is packaged as an ‘off the shelf ‘ event, with sportsmen that those interested in golf want to see, LIV comes with the baggage of sports washing. South Australia has partnered with the regime through its hosting and the tax payers money allocated to the event. No amount of marketing can untell that story. 

We urge the media to ask the hard questions of all those involved – the Grange Golf club, the Premier, the Ministers involved, the players and those engaged by the players – ask about the regime funding this event, ask about human rights.  

Melanie Carter 

19 April 2023