Rising Tension Over Pirltawardli and the North Adelaide Upgrade
The plan to host the Saudi-backed LIV Golf tournament in Adelaide from 2028 hinges on expanding the North Adelaide golf course, a move that would require tearing up sections of the course. Government documents acknowledge a “high probability” that remains lie beneath the surface about 1.5 metres deep. Indigenous elders and Kaurna native title holders say this is more than a planning nuisance—it is a direct threat to a sacred and historically central site known as Pirltawardli, a large ceremonial precinct once used as a gathering place for the Kaurna people.
Experts describe the southern part of the course as containing a substantial archaeological record tied to Pirltawardli, which hosted an Indigenous language school, a colonial store, and one of the state’s earliest Christian missions. Yet the project’s scope and the lack of broad, formal consultation have intensified concerns among custodians who view Pirltawardli as a living part of Kaurna identity and history.
What the Proposal Entails and Why It Matters
The government says the LIV Golf upgrade is necessary to accommodate a high-profile international tournament, with 2028 identified as a target. While the upgrade would improve facilities, it would also disrupt areas believed to contain burial remains. An Attorney-General’s Department report notes that human remains “cannot be avoided” and would have to be removed by an archaeologist if disturbed. Critics argue this amounts to a cultural and spiritual desecration of a site integral to Kaurna heritage.
Supporters emphasize economic and social benefits, including potential tourism and global exposure for South Australia. They point to a Vision Insights analysis claiming LIV Golf contributed about $81 million to the state in 2025 and generated thousands of visitor nights. But heritage advocates warn that monetary gains cannot justify erasing living culture or denying Kaurna custodians the dignity of proper burial and placement of their ancestors.
Voices From Kaurna Custodians
Mitzi Nam, chair of the Kaurna Yerta Aboriginal Corporation, says the site’s disturbance fuels distress among the community: “This is quite distressing… there should be more compassion about what this land means to us.” She notes a lack of formal consultation, despite her informal talks with the state’s Aboriginal affairs minister, Kyam Maher. Under the Heritage Act, she explains, the site cannot be disturbed without ministerial permission.
Lynette Crocker, chair of the Kaurna Nation Cultural Heritage Association, describes a painful history of ancestral burial sites being moved or stored in museums. “We wouldn’t knock down Adelaide’s cathedral,” she says, urging a respectful approach that honours Pirltawardli and supports cultural continuity. Susan Dixon, Kaurna custodian and spokesperson for the state’s First Nations voice, echoes the sentiment: the site’s cultural footprint runs deep, and reconciliation requires more than acknowledgement—it requires action that aligns with Kaurna voices.
Government Position and Legal Framework
A government spokesperson cited ongoing consultations, including a public meeting, and noted that submissions were requested prior to a decision. While the consultation window closed, officials say a review is underway, and the decision will reflect both development needs and heritage protections. Critics argue that genuine, structured consultation and a principled commitment to preserving Pirltawardli are essential, especially given the Heritage Act’s safeguards tied to ministerial authorization.
Beyond Economics: The Cultural Cost and the Path Forward
City of Adelaide’s reconciliation council urged preservation of Pirltawardli, calling for redevelopment to safeguard and interpret the site in ways that sustain cultural understanding. The council highlighted the obligation to recognize Kaurna custodianship and history in a manner that respects spiritual ties and reburial rights. The debate pits a potential economic boost against a living heritage that remains central to the Kaurna community’s identity and dignity. As stakeholders navigate this crossroads, the preference of many Indigenous leaders is clear: development must proceed without compromising the integrity of Pirltawardli and without sidelining Indigenous voices in the decision-making process.
What comes next
The state government says a formal decision will follow the preparation of a comprehensive report. For Kaurna communities, the next steps lie in intensified consultations, formal recognition of custodianship, and, where possible, routes to safeguard Pirltawardli while pursuing the region’s broader development goals.
Why this matters nationally
Across Australia, debates over development versus heritage have intensified as international events seek local venues. The Adelaide case underscores the need for robust protections of Indigenous ceremonial sites, transparent engagement with native title holders, and policies that respect cultural landscapes as living parts of a community’s history rather than mere barriers to progress.
