Fury has erupted after a controversial Greens bill that allows the government to seize private land without consent or compensation in order to “ease the housing crisis” passed the upper house in South Australia.
The Use of Vacant Land Bill made it through the Legislative Council with Labor support this week, and will now be considered in the House of Assembly, despite concerns over the unclear wording of the proposed legislation and warnings it is “poorly drafted” and a “fundamental breach of property rights”.
Pushed by the far-left Greens party, the bill amends the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 to enable to government to take control over land if it determines the owner is unwilling or unable to develop or make use of it, and if it is “appropriate” that the land be used for a public purpose.
“Public purpose” is defined by the bill as use as a public park or for recreation or sport, use for public housing, or any other use declared by the Minister to be a public purpose.
No compensation is necessary under the bill, and it only requires the government to take “reasonable steps” on “reasonable terms” while negotiating the acquisition of land, with no agreement from the owner needed.
Radical leftist LGBT activist Greens MP Robert Simms told parliament on Wednesday the bill was “deliberately broad” and that the aim was the give the government extra powers to “incentivise the development of long-term land”, using the example of an Adelaide site that was vacant for 30 years before being purchased by the government.
“The fact that the minister or the designated entity has been given these new powers might have the effect of incentivising the owner of land to actually do something with it. I deliberately have not stipulated specific timeframes and the like,” he said.
Liberal MP Michelle Lensink, the shadow minister for planning and housing, objected to the bill, warning parliament it was inspired by a similar program in the “socialist state of Victoria”.
“This bill effectively allows for occupation of private land without the consent of the landowner or payment of rent for it either, which is a fundamental breach of property rights that have operated in this state since settlement,” she said.
“It sets a precedent that would undermine confidence in secure land ownership, and that is very significant indeed. I think there would be a number of people who might otherwise operate in South Australia who would see that as a sovereign risk.
“We have concerns about key terms in this bill, such as ‘public purpose’ and ‘underutilised land’, and whether there is any appeal mechanism that would allow landowners to prevail against the designated entity’s decisions. There is also a concern about politicisation.”
She went on to warn that anyone in a “green NIMBY council” is going to be at high risk of the local government deciding to “use their land against their will”.
Urban Development Institute of Australia (SA) responded to the bill’s passing by calling it an “assault on fundamental property rights” that is “not only outrageous but dangerous”.
“Fundamentally, the idea that the state can take private property rights without compensation or consent is an affront to everything that we have as our legal system,” CEO Liam Golding told The Advertiser.
“The bill is just poorly drafted … there are no checks and balances. It’s utterly subjective and from a legal perspective there’s nothing stopping the government from saying that a week is long enough for development to have progressed. There’s also no definition of what underdeveloped land means.”
Australians also objected to the bill on social media, with conservative commentator Fred Pawle saying on X: “Australia is hurtling towards communism.”
Australia is hurtling towards communism. pic.twitter.com/bF9CIUm2Pf
— Fred Pawle (@FredPawle) June 7, 2025
“Expropriation without compensation is exactly what a communist government would do. It’s happening in South Africa as well,” one Australian said.
“First create a problem through massive immigration, then ‘fix’ it by seizing the property of the people who live there,” said another.
Mr Simms said the bill would not pass in its current form and only had in-principle support from the government, which would work with the crossbench to make changes in the lower house, and was intended to motivate developers.
“We don’t have the luxury of people being able to hoard vacant land while people sleep on the street … we’re in the middle of a housing crisis,” he said.
The land seizure push comes after the Greens earlier this year withdrew another controversial bill that would have allowed babies in brothels after massive backlash.
Header image: The former Le Cornu site at 88 O’Connell Street, North Adelaide, that was vacant for 30 years (City of Adelaide).
