1

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

Agenda for growthThe case for change; growth, reform, andinvestment for an even greater Greater Adelaide

April 2014

2

PO Box 650, Tynte StNorth Adelaide South Australia 5006

Cover image

Adelaide Airport, HASSELLPic credit: John Gollings

Image credits

Unless otherwise stated, images are owned by the Committee or its members and used with permission.

Incorporated Association No.41718

© Committee for Adelaide 2014

Who is the Committee for Adelaide?The Committee for Adelaide is a not for profit Incorporated Association that brings together people from all walks of life, and organisations from across sectors with a shared purpose; to step up and do what we can to help grow Adelaide, South Australia.

How do we hope to help?

We’re self-funded and independent, so we can be fearless in naming the challenge.

We’re an alliance of large and small from all backgrounds; government, private sector, not for profit and social enterprise so our networks are wide.

We’re non-partisan and apolitical, so solutions can be pragmatic – driven by evidence of what works, not by ideology or the election cycle.

We’re diverse, so we can draw on exper-tise beyond the usual; harnessing skills from networks that often go untapped.

How do we work?_Think, aspire, connect and act globally_Be creative and innovative in what we do_Network to create unique partnerships for productivity, to scale economies and to play beyond our size_Capture the value of what we create

Ultimately, we’re interested in open collaboration to find the new sources of growth, and the drivers needed to accel-erate innovation across our economy and community.

If you’d like to get in touch:info@committeeforadelaide.org.auwww.committeeforadelaide.org.au www.twitter.com/C4ADL

3

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

Agenda for Growth is a primer for discussion. It outlines a range of ideas designed to make the case for change. Some of these ideas challenge the sacred cows that stand in our way.

Why growth? Because growth in both our human and economic capital has stalled. Why is this a problem? A steadily ageing population combined with a decline in smart young workers over the next 10 years means more stress on support, services and infrastructure as the means to pay for these services declines. Less for sporting clubs and mothers groups, meals on wheels, libraries and public transport.

Getting growth right means attracting talented people with skills and resources to start new ventures; teaming private sector innovation with public services suited to the 21stC, and unlocking in-vestment in the infrastructure we need to grow.

We need to attract talented people to a resurgent city that has a future. We need SMART GROWTH supported by a state migration, employment and investment strategy

We need to team private sector innovation with public sector innovation. We need SMART REFORMS so our public services are sustainable - so they really can be the best in the nation

We need to reinvest in our economic and social infrastructure. We need SMART

INVESTMENT that attracts private capital if we want to do more with less. Adelaide is not short of ideas. We think they fail to get traction because too often, they are presented as separate, not connected.

Agenda for Growth is our attempt to make the connection between smarter growth and the reforms and investment needed to make it happen.

A city in contextSouth Australia’s minerals, resources, agriculture, wine and food represent more than just our major exports. They also represent the brand of a state rich in productive capacity, innovation and invention. Our farmers, winemakers, producers and miners rely on knowledge, research and advanced technology to create value through processing, manufacturing and marketing. Our city relies on its producers. And our state’s riches rely on city smarts.

Greater Adelaide is our door to the global knowledge economy. It provides the most employment choice for workers, and options for employers. Inner metropolitan Adelaide employs more than the rest of Greater Adelaide put together - in sectors that engage in technology, knowledge and innovation including health and community services, public service and administration, education and business services.

Jobs go to where the infrastructure is. Around 2/3rds of all health and community service jobs are located in inner Adelaide; clustered around our major hospitals, health providers and re-search infrastructure. 2/3rds of our professionals and almost 3/4 of

property and business service professionals are also in the inner Ade-laide region1. Unley has 15 times the num-ber of residents with PhDs than Playford, despite Playford being closer to a major university at Mawson Lakes.

Why? Because inner metro Adelaide has the right infrastructure in place.

Opportunity has a postcodeRight now, opportunity has a postcode. We want more opportunity for more people to be a part of Adelaide’s growth; to experience, invest and share in its return. The truth is, opportunity is not yet evenly distributed across Adelaide. Measuring opportunity across the city shows that outcomes fall by half between Adelaide’s centre and its edges.

Households in Noarlunga are twice as likely to experience poverty as those in Burnside. People in Playford are twice as likely to need assistance than those in the city of Adelaide, half as likely to have completed year 12, and likely live in neighbourhoods rated half as walkable.

If we want to retain our best, attract talent from interstate and overseas, and be appealing to international investment, then Adelaide must be the magnet; offer-ing the thriving, mixed communities they want, with a regular pipeline of infrastruc-ture that’s appealing to investors.

Right now, as James Young from Colliers International says; “Adelaide doesn’t have a land problem. We have a demand problem”. Agenda for Growth is about making sure we grow in the right way, and create greater demand to unlock an even greater, Greater Adelaide.

Gettinggrowthright

4

While the figures on opportunity may be alarming, they aren’t surprising. We’re starting behind.

Our share of the national infrastructure shortfall is estimated to exceed $30bn2. This means we’re failing to invest at the rate needed to build the schools, training centres and neighbourhood facilities; the roads, rail and public transport to move people, goods and resources to where they need to be, and the social programs to support those falling behind.

Todays roadmap for growthLike any city, Adelaide needs to plan how and where we want to grow. The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide is our roadmap, and the state’s Strategic Infrastructure Plan is our inventory. The 30 Year Plan forecasts the city to grow by 560,000 people requiring 258,000 additional homes, generate $127.7bn of economic activity, and create 282,000 jobs.

Government backed the plan with around $11.4bn of infrastructure over four years from 2009 - much of it now coming to completion. So where to next?

At its core is the development of 14 ‘transit oriented developments’. But the overall scope and cost of infrastructure required to deliver the 30 Year Plan is unknown, and uncosted.

And since the four years since it’s launch, the global economic, and local population landscape has changed. South Australia’s growth has slowed to the slowest on the Australian mainland. 32,000 more people have left the state than arrived since 1999; the majority of them aged between 20-39 and highly educated.

Losing our talented, prime working age people will leave us without the means to fund the infrastructure we need.

We need to rethink the basic premise of our 30 Year Plan. If we consolidated development even further, we could streamline the delivery of infrastructure; meaning more investment in fewer, better centres; more easily linked into migration and investment programs.

Assuming responsibility How we choose to grow and develop dictates the cost and investment needed to make it happen.

Thinking differently about how we plan and develop the infrastructure we need could open up more opportunties for not for profit providers, private enterprise and institutional funds to help bring more op-portunities to more people. More sources of suppport and services.

If we want to do more with less we must listen to the evidence - greater private sector involvement in identifying and scoping projects adds value3. And mak-ing more of the infrastructure we have in place saves us money.

Smart growth needs smart reform and smart investment to bring it to life.

Our infrastructure needs are beyond politics. Our leaders rightly play a role in setting strategy and goals, but there’s a bigger role for the private sector, profes-sionals and experts to meet these goals.

Agenda for Growth is about all of us assuming more responsibility in shaping the plans that shape our city.

“Planning for good public

transport beyond the centre

helps those in the north and

south. It’s about providing

opportunity to those who don’t

have it now.”

So we’re asking:

Are we starting behind?

What sort of city will attract the people, business and capital we need to sustain the life we have?

Do we need a more strategic, indepen-dent, place-based approach to planning infrastructure?

Can we balance public participation in planning infrastructure with the need to give confidence to investors?

What should the next 30 Year Plan look like?

We’re startingbehind

5

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

73%

67%

46%

32%

54%

Rings of opportunity:Year 12 completion rates in Greater Adelaide

6

What is smart growth? Smart growth combines social, urban and economic growth with the environment. It uses long-range, regional scale thinking and combines community, culture and place with factors like transport, employment and housing; ensures both the costs and benefits of development is shared; and promotes better public health.

Why isn’t it just happening?Adelaide is consistently rated one of the most liveable cities in one of the most liveable countries in the world. Our unique quality of life, access to pris-tine blue skies and clean seas, wealth of resources and ease of access to places and decision makers should mean our greatest challenge is managing rampant inward growth.

But is this driver for growth or are we banking on a ‘do nothing’ strategy to get us by? Adelaide competes with other cit-ies offering greater opportunities with half the quality of life. Maybe lifestyle is not everything. Have our riches and resources made us complacent?

We need a smarter model of growth.In 2013, McKinsey & Company analyzed a comprehensive set of urban econom-ic, social and environmental indicators; interviewed mayors and city leaders in governments on four continents to better understand the factors in successfully planning, managing and investing for growth. They found it came down to 3 things;• Achieving smart growth; the need to

adopt a strategic approach, to plan for change, to integrate environmental thinking and to insist on opportunity for all

munities are more self-sustaining and more able to provide the informal support people need to avoid reliance on public services to intervene.

A State Migration StrategyOrganizations like the Property Council and Business SA have called for action on migration. We agree. We need a cross cutting state migration strategy. A State migration strategy must include action to;• identify the skills needed to grow

those industries where we have a natural and existing advantage

• leverage our educational export markets to boost international student numbers, and more actively encour-age trade and private investment through these channels

• secure joint Federal, state co-opera-tion on migration status to ease the application and entry for skilled mi-grants and those with the resources we need, including high nett wealth entrepreneurs likely to invest in new business and joint ventures

• make the most of our global diaspora, including the professional and capital resources of those located outside the state but still connected to our community

• better integrate state investment, business incentive and migration programs to promote investment in our state strategic, and urban infra-structure to boost local development through private finance and better access to institutional funds

We are in a race for migrants with skills and resources. Making visas easier to access is a start, but only comprehensive action shared by the private and public sector will make a difference.

Smart Growth; more, better,sustainable

• Do more with less; including better ways to assess and manage expenses rigorously; exploring partnerships; investment accountability and to better embrace technology

• Win support for change; including the need for our leaders to craft a per-sonal vision; build high performing teams in a culture of accountability, and forge stakeholder consensus.4

Smart growth attracts smart peopleAgenda for Growth explains why we must retain our prime working age people, and attract migrants with skills and resources to help invest in our sustainable growth. We are competing with other cities. So what type of city are these talented, glob-ally-mobile people attracted to?

The Brookings Institution put it bluntly;Talented people want to work and live in urban places that are walkable, bikeable, connected by transit, and hyper-caffeinat-ed. Major companies across multiple sec-tors are practicing “open innovation” and want to be close to other firms, research labs, and universities. Entrepreneurs want to start their companies in collaborative spaces, where they can share ideas and have efficient access to everything from legal advice to sophisticated lab equip-ment.5

Smart growth brings smart people closer to employment choice, housing, shops, schools and transport conveniently positioned to serve entreperneurial small businesses, connect sectors like agricul-ture to national and global trade and to bring people with ideas closer to bigger markets and investors. It’s how markets work best. And, done right, it’s how our communities work best. Compact com-

7

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

How and where we grow, mattersIt costs less to grow existing communities where infrastructure is in place, than to create new ones. Expanding transport, power and water in existing communities costs around half that of a new services in a new subdivision. Delivering education services to an existing centre can cost ten times less than a new subdivision.6

Integrating development in to existing communities creates more jobs and eco-nomic activity, while reducing the need for expensive greenfields infrastructure like schools, roads, hospitals and utilities.

In Adelaide, infrastructure costs to sup-port fringe housing averages $80,500 per dwelling, compared with $20,000 per dwelling for infill. That’s a difference of $60m/ 1000 homes.7

So how and where we invest in our infra-structure, matters. If we want to provide services for people, it means investing more in our existing centres. Because we need to do more with less.

We need to radically reshape our city. We can’t spread investment across 14 urban centres. We need new investment in four ‘super centres’ where infrastructure is already in place. Centres like;

Adelaide Inner Metro A centre for education, knowledge, research and training, professional and advanced business services, a home for global service firms and local centres for multinational enterprises, our primary cultural institutions; celebrating art, design and craft in proximity to philan-thropy, and not for profit enterprise.

Specialising in health, medicine and pharmaceutical research and services, linked to health technologies and high end tourism seeking elective procedures in centres with high amenity.

Port Adelaide MetroA unique centre for European and ab-original cultural heritage, hospitality and seafood, environment, boating, marine research and training and as a centre servicing the ‘coastal chain’ communities of Outer Harbour, Largs Bay, Sempahore, Tennyson and West Lakes. This centre builds on recent work to plan a viable fu-ture for Port Adelaide, and brings invest-ment to long standing community efforts to develop the Port.

Elizabeth metroA new CBD competing for defence, ICT and energy technology, horticulture and viticulture, health and community services, social innovation in ageing and neighbourhood wellbeing, and small scale high value manufacturing. A revitalised Elizabeth Centre would build on the original Playford vision of a self-sustain-ing city with a mix of housing, migration, employment and new industry servicing Gawler, Barossa and the north.

Marion metroCentred on the ‘triple core’ of Marion Central, new development at Tonsley’s innovation precinct, and an expanded Flinders University campus; specialising in technology and advanced manufac-turing, food technology, health/medical technology and tourism, mining and engineering, construction innovation, indigenous learning and culture servicing Noarlunga, McLaren Vale and the Fleurieu

The real value of tthese four centres is that it simplifies the connecting infrastructure that would improve public services by making possible;• high speed, fixed line transit between

major centres• a radial bus network linking high

speed transit with local communities • streamlined delivery of public infra-

structure in more accessible centres• large scale development that aggre-

gates available, under-utilised land for mixed use development, and more easily deliver a mix of adaptable facilities such as cultural, commu-nity functions, affordable and social housing for key workers alongside business and clean tech industry employment.

• more reliable pipeline of infrastruc-ture, more focused on key centres; boosting the opportunity for institu-tional funds to take a stake and share the investment and return

So we’re asking:

Do we need a game changing state migration strategy?

Should we accept that 14 urban centres are beyond our means?

Don’t four major centres make more sense?

Can we anchor new growth in our inner metro communities to support a CBD of 60,000?

How do we better connect quality urban development with sustainable economic

development?

8

Smart growth needs smart public services.

We know that public services work better the closer they are to the problem they’re designed to help. It ensures service deliv-ery can be tailored to the need, and not a generic ‘one size fits all’. Often, this means getting public services ‘out’ of a cen-tralising government culture, and into a partnership those experienced in service delivery.

We need to move from a public services culture of ‘steady as she goes’ to an active, agile and collaborative agent of change.

How it isTodays structure of government is a 19th century tool for 21st century problems. Social media and social networks share information in real time; placing new demands on government. We can access public data in real time and decide for ourselves how we want to use public services. We can document where repair or upgrade is needed in our street via a smartphone App.

But public policy and public services are still often developed assuming ‘one size fits all’, and often in isolation from the problem, or those who deliver solutions on the ground.

Public services share a set of common characteristics, and struggle with similar cultural challenges, including;• Selective use of available information

- often lacking access to an evidence base despite leading research in the field being available.

• Reaction not foresight - where the urgent defeats the important as policy design chases the media cycle

• Performance against targets are often measured by agencies ‘marking their own howmework’ without indepen-dent verification

• Seeking the path of least political resistance - aiming for targets that are easily achievable, or diluting needed reforms because they may be difficult to achieve in a parliamentary term

• Doing the right thing, only to go about it the wrong way; seeking change, but failing to invest in winning support for it

• Failure to act as an expert client. Lack of ‘client side’ expertise can mean the taxpayer fails to get what they pay for when government engages with the more sophisticated private sector8 - resulting in an average cost premium of 17% over the results achieved by comparable private-sector organiza-tions.9

Government is too big to fail, but it often sets itself up to do just that. It matters when decisions are made with no one in the room with an understanding of the issue at hand. And it matters when gov-ernments fail to engage or communicate what they’re doing and why.10

Change @ SASouth Australia’s public sector renewal program is shifting the emphasis of our public services to a more citizen centric model. A series of short 90-day demon-stration projects is about creating confi-dence in change and innovation in public sector services.

Pilots include;1. Redesigning procurement to develop local opportunities in the APY lands aims to work across government to change

civil and infrastructure procurement to better encourage training and employ-ment opportunities for local aboriginal people.

2. End of life care 7 step pathway ensures patients and their families are able to work with clinicians to actively plan the often difficult end of life decisions

3. Reducing red tape for the tuna industry reduces the regulatory burden for South Australia’s bluefin tuna industry by speed-ing up the time it takes to gain approvals for a licence each year. Public services have been redesigned to suit the annual fishing and farming cycle which is deter-mined, afterall, by migration patterns. Not processing times.

Early signs are that these reforms result in savings in time, and better ways of work-ing that more actively involve communi-ties in supporting themselves. Valuable as these initiatives are, more must be done to create a more permeable public service; one that is entrepreneurial in its mindset and whose performance and reward is measured by its early and genuine ability to work productively with the private sec-tor, and not for profit enterprise.

Even those inside public service agree we need to ‘disrupt’ entrenched institutional interests if we want to radically rethink how services are delivered.

The enabling state We need a strong state public sector that is rewarded when it takes an end-user focus and is responsive to citizen needs.We need to adapt our public services for the 21st century. To adapt we need;

Smart reform: public services for the 21st C

9

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

• Entities that are arms length from government, with real power to advise and influence - outside of the bureaucratic capture that can act as a barrier to constructive engagement with non government.

• Leaders prepared to make govern-ment more visible, transparent and accountable. This can be done by using ‘data dashboards’ that are inde-pendently monitored, not pre-wired to forever jackpot.

• A constantly engaged, end user focus to government, driven by a closer working relationship with industry to develop insights and derive the greatest value from investment in infrastructure or services

• Small, elite innovation units combin-ing experts and generalists; govern-ment and non government to seek global models and help apply them across the whole of government, including training in innovation skills and new ways of working. Exam-ples, like Denmark’s Mindlab, is cross cutting, arms length, evidence-based, and citizen focused.

We need an enabling state that works more effectively, and in better partnership with a professional, strategic and sustain-able local government network.

“We had a small issue. We had to meet with 12 local officials who didn’t understand what their own area was doing.That’s not OK”

Leading local governmentOur local councils provide critical services that cater to the needs of their residents, community organizations and small businesses.

But many councils in South Australia lack the scale or capability to plan strategically, or deliver on the needs of their commu-nities. Revenues are declining as demand for their services increase. Grants revenue is falling due to lower population growth11, and studies suggest local govt investment in infrastructure in SA is about $100m less than required12. No wonder opportunity has a postcode.

Pricewaterhouse Coopers reports that at least 40% of South Australia’s 68 local councils may be unsustainable.13

We need to rethink the model of local government to boost its own revenue, improve services in their communities, professionalise the operations provided by Councils and create a reliable pipeline of infrastructure that attracts investors.

In late 2013, an Expert Panel appoint-ed by the Local Govt Association tabled a report; entitled Strengthening South Australian communities in a changing world. Its work aimed to improve political and corporate governance with enhanced accountabiltiy and transparency; increase community engagement; provide sound financial and asset management; improve services, strengthen inter-governmental relations and promote regional collabo-ration.

The panel found that the demographic and economic changes facing us over coming decades demands that Councils

seriously rethink their role, functions and structures.14 This rethink must occur in parallel with a broader debate over the future form of our public services in the 21st century..

Professionalise local governmentLocal government reform is discussed regularly, but generally lacks a compelling logic. Change, yes; but to what? And why?Agenda for Growth finally puts the horse before the cart - starting with the city we all want, before asking how our public services might be best designed to deliver and administer that city.

We need to reinvest in better, more viable centres, and we need to invest in the administration of those centres. Four major councils administering four major centres. This would boost the capability of local government, would streamline decision making, pool resources and ex-pand the shared capital and infrastructure available for everyone - wherever they choose to live.

So we’re asking:

How do we massively ‘scale up’ work like Change @ SA to move from small pilots to permanent reform across the board?

Would larger Councils ensure sustainable local government with clear strategic purpose, and the means to deliver on their goals?

What about 4 councils for 4 centres? Elizabeth, Inner Metro, Port Adelaide & Marion where the infrastructure is already in place?

10

Agenda for Growth means being smart about how we plan, fund and deliver the infrastructure we need for growth. And being smarter in how we use the infra-structure we already have.

Public funding will become more con-stained over the next decade, so we need to develop options now for how we source the capital to bring more opportu-nity to more people.

Even Infrastructure Australia believes the funding of our urban infrastructure is now a pressing financial issue for all gov-ernments.15 We think the answer lies in sharing the risk and reward of investing.

We think a broader portfolio of funding sources from the private sector and from not-for-profit enterprise would help.

Some options include; • Attracting significant investor mi-

grants seeking to take a stake in South Australia

• Attracting institutional funds pre-pared to invest for the long term in significant infrastructure that grows our resources sector, and supports communities through better urban infrastructure

• Smarter ‘recycling’ of infrastructure likely to allow reinvestment and re-newal in new infrastructure

• Prudent use of ‘user pay‘ programs to better manage the demand and use of our infrastructure

• Stimulating ‘pay for success’ pro-grams funded through social impact bonds that can be funded by private equity, and driven by results.

Significant investors - taking a stakeAttracting ten high nett wealth investor migrants each year under a South Austra-lian regional Significant Investor Visa (SIV) program could generate $50m in new capital investment, along with a further $100m in related value created through their support for new ventures, or joint ventures with existing local businesses.

But currently, the rules do little to encour-age investment in property and urban infrastructure. Many migrant investors prefer to invest directly in projects and property, but are often directed to man-aged funds or infrastructure bonds.16

We need to develop more options fast if we want to make the most of those seeking to be part of our community, and encourage investment in smart growth. Our university’s and international student market need to be linked in to this attract-ing strategy.

Institutional funds looking to the long termThe total value of Australia’s Superannua-tion funds is more than $1.4 trillion. Many of these funds are seeking to finance physical instructure including housing, rail, ports, roads and neighbouring scale facilities.

Australian Super invested in Melbourne’s desalination plant. Industry Funds Man-agement invested in the Port of Brisbane.

Infrastructure bonds can be an effective way to attract funds for local infrastruc-ture. Bonds like this allow securities to be issued to finance public infrastructure, and are often issued with tax free status.

Recycling infrastructure creates fundsSome infrastructure creates revenue - like rail lines and airports. Some doesn’t - like schools. Wherever revenue is created, there’s an opportunity for the taxpayer to recoup the initial cost of building the rail line or airport, and to share the revenue with a new owner; like a Superannuation fund.

Between 2006-2009, Queensland divest-ed infrastructure like power generation and gas distribution, airports and motor-ways, resulting in $17bn of new revenue.17

A portion of these proceeds has been used to redevelop the city following flood damage in 2010 and 2013. This is an ex-ample of how capital can be recycled and reused for new needs.

Communicating why and where new revenue will be invested, and how this will help improve services to people is critical for leaders when explaining what can be a complex financial agreement.

Shared investment84% of infrastructure in Austria is deliv-ered via private finance.18 By contrast only around 1.5% of South Australia’s infra-structure needs are delivered in this way.

Common models include Public Private Partnerships, and Private Finance Initia-tives. In the past, private finance agree-ments have battled to gain public support since terms are generally commercial in confidence. But properly designed models of shared investment can deliver savings in design and construction while main-tainining quality over the long term.

Smart investment: more with less

11

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

Prudent use of ‘user pays’The idea behind ‘user pays’ is that it can be an incentive to optimise the design, delivery and operation of infrastructure so long as public good, transparency and accountability is rigorously observed.

There’s a growing body of evidence suggesting that a user pays approach to roads may help reduce congestion and improve travel times for industry, freight carriers and the like. A road charging scheme could help better fund the repair and maintenance of existing roads, the upgrade of roadside landscape or a new network of bike and bus lanes to improve our transport network.

Pay for success programsSocial Impact Bonds (SIB) are a means of securing capital for not-for-profit orga-nizations to deliver programs that seek to create impact in social problems such as juvenile justice, disability, homelessness or mental health.

Under a SIB, a bond-issuing entity raises capital from investors based on a contract with government to deliver improved social outcomes that generate savings for government. These savings are then used to pay investors a ‘reward’ in addition to the repayment of the principal, so long as outcomes are achieved.19

It’s about doing more with less. In this model, government works to enable service delivery outside of government; growing the capacity of the not for profit sector that is more likely to achieve its targets, and help those most in need.

Expand investment categoriesCurrent work to attract investment in South Australia - for example through Invest in SA - encourages international investment in sectors like resources, agriculture, health & biomedical research.Urban infrastructure and development is not currently a category identified for investment, but that may be needed if we want to compete for a broader range of funding sources in the future.

Invite unsolicited Proposals A transparent method to recieve unsolic-itored proposals from private sector con-sortia, private providers or not for profit enterprise could attract entrepreneurial ideas from those with the means to invest in the infrastructure we need. This could take the form of an ‘innovation challenge’; opening up the provision of community based services, or project delivery to non government.

Consider Tax Increment FinancingTax Increment Financing is a clever way to fund infrastructure - especially when private investment can be hard to attract. TIF is a means of capturing the value added to a site or precinct when upgrade nearby lifts its market value. By assuming the higher value in future tax or rates rev-enue, governments can ‘spend against’.

Incentives to attract R&D investmentIreland has worked aggressively to attract companies that are at the forefront of the knowledge & digital economy; includ-ing pharmaceuticals and tech giants like Google and Apple. R&D tax breaks and other incentives show an entrepreneurial attitutde by government. And it’s paying off - Ireland is recovering fast from the global financial crisis.

“Private wealth exists here but it can be hidden, and it’s often managed off shore. The down-side of a large family-owned business sector is that it can be hard to know if, where and how private business supports not for profit or charities”

So we’re asking:

Can we do more with less by better sharing the risk and the reward that comes with investing?

Do we need a ‘shared investment target’ to encourage clever alternative financing? Say, 20% by 2020?

Would state infrastructure bonds lift investment?

Are we keeping pace with global best practice when it comes to infrastructure planning and investment?

Do we need to ‘bet the house’ on becoming a regional enterprise zone with migration and investment incentives?

12

What have wemissed?Agenda for Growth aims to build a comprehensive agenda for smart growth; supported by evidence, and published by the Committee for Adelaide in order to prompt informed discussion on things we can do, and ways we can help.

Some of these ideas are things that governments can do; like working with industry to open up more path ways for investment in the infrastruc-ture we need.

Other ideas are relevant to us all - like deciding the sort of city we want, and ways we might achieve it by working together. Or how we think our public services can be more ready for the 21st century.

This primer has been prepared for a workshop to be held in Adelaide on 29 March 2014. But we know smart people and clever ideas aren’t always in the right room at the right time.

So if you have constructive ideas on what smart growth, smart reform or smart investment could mean for Adelaide and South Australia, let us know.

Visit us at:www.committeeforadelaide.org.au

or drop us a line on twitter at:www.twitter.com/C4ADL

Sources

1. Dept of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations, Regional Profile for Adelaide Labour Market Region p12

2. based on a conservative estimate of our state’s share of the $700bn national infrastructure shortfall calculated by Infra-structure Australia

3. McKinsey, January 2013, Infrastructure productivity; how to save $1 trillion a year p8

4. 2013, McKinsey & Company, How to make a city great p1

5. January 16, 2014, Bruce Katz & Julie Wagner, What a city needs to foster innovation, Brookings Institution

6. Peter Newman, Assessing the costs of Altenrative develop-ment paths in Australian cities Curtin University, p2

7. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/planning-minister-john-rau-releases-new-development-studies-revealing-high-costs-of-fringe-housing-to-their-owners-and-other-taxpayers/story-fni6uo1m-1226822045753

8. McKinsey Infrastructure productivity: how to save $1 trillion a year, p.32

9. McKinsey p43

10. Inspired by Geoff Mulghan, January 2014 [draft 1] Rewiring the brain; a rough blueprint for reforming centres of govern-ment page unknown

11. Burgan 2013 Financing of Local Government Service deliv-ery in to the future, Uni of Adelaide p.4

12. Burgan p.15

13. Pricewaterhouse Coopers, National Financial Sustainability Study of Local Government 2006 p.11

14. 2013 Strengthening South Australian communities in a changing world p.18

15. Infrastructure Australia, December 2013, Urban Transport Strategy p17

16. BRW, Michael Bleby 16 May 2013, Australia’s first 888 visa investor gets passport stamp www.brw.com.au/p/business/australia_first_visa_investor_gets_h4yBaQxYLSb1unHXPFxVBP

17. McKinsey Infrastructure Productivity p.28

18. McKinsey Infrastructure Productivity p.24

19. Report on the NSW Government Social Impact Bond Pilot p7

13

Committee for Adelaide: Agenda for Growth

© Committee for Adelaide 2014