South Australia’s Premier, Peter Malinauskas, is under scrutiny for awarding a golf course redesign contract to Greg Norman Golf Course Design without a tender process. This decision, linked to the establishment of LIV Golf within Adelaide’s heritage-listed parklands, has sparked controversy among critics and political opponents.
The contract, awarded by the state Labor government, has raised concerns about the Premier’s use of power, particularly given the government’s significant majority. Greg Norman, an Australian golfing legend and a LIV Golf Board member, has been a controversial figure since his involvement with the Saudi-backed tour.
Controversial Contract Award
The South Australian government defended its decision, citing Greg Norman’s specialist skills and reputation. However, critics argue that the process lacked transparency. Crossbench MP Frank Pangallo expressed his disapproval, stating that the City Council had been “shafted” by the decision.
“I’m supportive of LIV Golf but the way the premier has gone about this is quite arrogant and I think it indicates the hubris of this government,” Pangallo stated.
Pangallo also highlighted the government’s high public popularity, suggesting it allows them to act with impunity. He pointed to unresolved issues such as cost of living pressures and healthcare system challenges as areas needing urgent attention.
Government’s Justification and Opposition
In response, State Urban Development Minister Nick Champion explained that the government took control from the City Council to avoid delays in the redevelopment. Champion emphasized the benefits of the project for South Australia, despite the criticisms.
“We’re taking a golf course and it’s becoming an even better golf course,” Champion remarked. “They’re the ones making this an issue of controversy.”
Meanwhile, the City Council’s Lord Mayor, Jane Lomax-Smith, felt blindsided by the government’s announcement, which occurred during her overseas business trip. The council has managed the North Adelaide Golf Course for over a century, and Lomax-Smith expressed disappointment over the lack of collaboration.
“Our investment is being removed and … this is not a particularly collaborative way to do business,” she said.
Broader Implications and Future Prospects
The controversy also touches on broader issues surrounding LIV Golf, which is funded by Saudi Arabia’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. Critics have accused the fund of “sportswashing” to divert attention from the country’s human rights record.
Despite the backlash, the redevelopment is set to proceed, with the course expected to host LIV Golf events from 2028. However, the financial details of the contract with Greg Norman’s company remain undisclosed, prompting calls for transparency from figures like Pangallo.
“The government needs to be up-front about it, it’s taxpayers’ money,” Pangallo insisted.
The redevelopment is projected to cost at least $45 million, with the government arguing that it will bring significant economic benefits. This year’s LIV Golf event reportedly delivered an $81 million windfall to the state.
Community and Environmental Concerns
Local golfers have expressed support for the Premier, praising the potential for a world-class golf course in Adelaide. However, concerns remain about the environmental impact and potential cost increases for club members.
Minister Champion assured that environmental considerations are being addressed, with plans to plant three trees for every one removed during the redevelopment. Yet, the long-term financial implications for the state and club members remain uncertain.
“This is going to cost the state a lot of money to maintain. Who’s going to maintain it? Where is the money going to come from … how much are the memberships going to be?” Pangallo questioned.
As Adelaide prepares to host more international events, the debate over the golf course redevelopment highlights the tensions between economic development and community interests. The government’s confidence in the project’s benefits is evident, but critics remain vigilant, calling for accountability and transparency.
