Estimates Vote

State Governor's Establishment, $6,539,000

Auditor-General's Department, $19,671,000

Department of the Premier and Cabinet, $469,788,000

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, $32,176,000

Minister:

Hon. P.B. Malinauskas, Premier.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr D. Walker, Chief Executive, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Ms N. Chandler, Deputy Chief Executive, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Mr R. Morris, Chief Executive Officer, Premier's Delivery Unit, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Mr W. Hunter, Chief Operating Officer, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Dr E. Balan-Vnuk, Chief Information Officer, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Ms D. Dixon, State Project Lead, Lot Fourteen, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Mr M. Warren, Chief Executive, South Australian Motor Sport Board.

Mr J. Conway, Chief Executive Officer, Infrastructure SA.

The CHAIR: Welcome to today's hearing for Estimates Committee A. I respectfully acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the traditional owners of this country throughout Australia and their connection to land and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures and to elders both past and present.

The estimates committees are a relatively informal procedure and, as such, there is no need to stand to ask or answer questions. I understand that the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition have agreed on an approximate time for the consideration of proposed payments, which will facilitate a change of departmental advisers. Can the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition confirm that the timetable for today's proceedings, previously distributed, is accurate?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes.

The CHAIR: Changes to committee membership will be notified as they occur. Members should ensure the Chair is provided with a completed request to be discharged form. If the Premier undertakes to supply information at a later date, it must be submitted to the Clerk Assistant via the Answers to Questions mailbox no later than Friday 6 September 2024.

I propose to allow both the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition to make opening statements of about 10 minutes each should they wish to do so. There will be some flexible approach to giving the call for asking questions. A member who is not on the committee may ask a question at the discretion of the Chair.

All questions are to be directed to the Premier, not the Premier's advisers. The Premier may refer questions to advisers for a response. Questions must be based on lines of expenditure in the budget papers and must be identifiable or referenced. Members unable to complete their questions during the proceedings may submit them as questions on notice for inclusion in the assembly Notice Paper.

I remind members that the rules of debate in the house apply in the committee. Consistent with the rules of the house, photography by members from the chamber floor is not permitted while the committee is sitting. Ministers and members may not table documents before the committee; however, documents can be supplied to the Chair for distribution. The incorporation of material in Hansard is permitted on the same basis as applies in the house; that is, it is purely of a statistical nature and is limited to one page in length.

The committee's examinations will be broadcast in the same manner as the sittings of the house, through the IPTV system within Parliament House and online via the parliament's website. I think the ratings will go through the roof today.

I will now proceed to open the following lines for examination: we are now opening State Governor's Establishment, Auditor-General's Department, Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Productivity Commission and Infrastructure SA. The minister appearing is the Premier. I declare the proposed payments open for examination, and I now call on the Premier to make a statement if he wishes and also to introduce his advisers.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Good morning, Mr Chairman. I have no intention to chew up the opposition leader's time with an opening statement, except to say that I would like to express my gratitude to all the officials who have worked so hard in the development of the budget first and foremost, and I particularly acknowledge officials within the Department of Treasury and Finance who have undertaken that work under the leadership of Rick Persse, the Under Treasurer, and also the Treasurer of South Australia.

Can I thank public servants and officials from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet who have ably assisted me in the preparation for today, including developing a suite of briefings that hopefully will enable us to answer the Leader of the Opposition's questions as best we can. That effort is led, of course, through the Chief Executive, Mr Damien Walker; the Deputy Chief Executive of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Nari Chandler; and, on my right, executive director Wayne Hunter. I look forward to hopefully being able to answer the questions to the best of our ability today.

The CHAIR: Thank you, Premier. The Leader of the Opposition.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I do not propose to make an opening statement, apart from to thank the officials like the Premier has for the contribution that they made to the process. My first suite of questions come from Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, pages 13 and 14. My first question refers to the number of FTEs for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. The number of FTEs has increased from 531 in the 2022-23 financial year to approximately 600 in the 2023-24 financial year, including two that are described as, and I quote, 'Administered items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet'. Can the Premier explain the nature of the administered items, those two FTEs?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Is that referred to on page 13?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Page 13, if you look at the workforce summary.

The CHAIR: At the top of page 13.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We will hopefully be able to get the answer while—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: And as part of that question, I was curious as to whether or not that was an allocation for ministers, so that might be part of the answer.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: An allocation to a minister's office?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Whether those two administered items are potentially an allocation for ministers but, regardless, I will move on and let you explore that. The next one was I referred to the significant increase in FTEs that had occurred. Are you able to provide an overview of the areas in which those FTEs have been employed?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There are a few programs that are ending and therefore the numbers are reducing, and then there are other programs where they are going up. I am happy to provide the advice that I have received regarding some examples of that. The advice I received is as follows. Resources ending in the 2023-24 financial year include:

Office of Data Analytics, including succession of data analytics capacity funding provided for in the 2021-22 state budget, of 5 FTEs, and once-off resources that were allocated in 2023-24 for across-government projects of 5 FTEs;

one-off resources in 2023-24 for the Office of the Chief Information Officer for a new whole-of-government service offering an integration platform as a service, which was worth 4 FTEs; and

one-off resources for Infrastructure SA project monitoring activities of 3 FTEs.

That is going down. In terms of additional resources in terms of FTEs for 2024-25, programs going up include 6 FTEs for the Strong Cyber Future Ready program, which is funded from the Digital Investment Fund; the new program we are establishing around the Children in the North alliance is 5 FTEs; and the Preventing African Youth Violence initiative is going up by 1 FTE.

Just to provide a bit more holistic detail that perhaps speaks more to the heart of the Leader of the Opposition's question, the increase of 68.8 FTEs between the 2022-23 actual and the 2023-24 estimated result—that is not 2024-25 but the 2022-23 actual versus the estimated result of 2023-24—is made up for by the following additional resources in 2023-24 for:

13.2 FTEs for the cyber and digital programs funded through the Digital Investment Fund;

12 FTEs for strategic policy capability and delivery;

7 FTEs for a transfer that has occurred in government between Creative Industries and the Music Development Office, which has come over from DIIS to DPC;

6 FTEs for Serving South Australia, which is our election commitment of developing a one-stop shop;

5 FTEs for the Office for AUKUS;

5 FTEs for the Office of Data Analytics capability supplementation;

more recently, in April this year, the Cross Border Commissioner was transferred from PIRSA and I have MOG'd it into the Department of the Premier and Cabinet;

4 FTEs for the Office of the Chief Information Officer;

3 FTEs for the Children in the North program;

3 FTEs for Infrastructure SA monitoring activities;

2.3 FTEs for the DPC component of the Health Reform Office;

2 FTEs for activities associated with the Master Media levies;

1.3 FTEs for supplies and services to employees' expenses with associated FTEs—I confess I am not too sure what that is, but I am happy to find out; and

1 FTE for the increased the capacity of the Office for Autism.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I did not keep a running tally, but that seems to get to the 68 or so, so thank you, Premier. Has the government been able to achieve a reduction in executive numbers across government by 50, and did the Department of the Premier and Cabinet reduce its number of executives as part of this goal?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: While Mr Hunter is getting the specifics, yes is the short answer to your question initially. More recently, I think we have added a couple on the back of the budget supplementation that we sought.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So, yes, to the overall 50?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, let me double-check. DPC's contribution to that executive reduction, and it is 50 across government, is going to be three executive FTEs. My advice is that the obligation upon the department is to have that implemented by 1 July this year. The advice that I have is that, notwithstanding the three, there are seven direct executive director roles. I will just state them: between 1 July 2023 and 9 May 2024, seven executive positions were abolished is the advice that was received. These positions were vacant and no longer required: executive director of communities and corporate—there were five executive directors, a SAES 1 position, who was the technology strategist, and then the director of strategy projects and social policy was also a SAES 1 category.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So those are the executives of then DPC and more broadly. I may be slightly outside the scope, but has the government been able to achieve or is it on track to achieve that reduction of 50 across government?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, that's Treasury. DTF are monitoring that, so that will be a question for them. Just to come back, notwithstanding the numbers I have just given you, these are the ones who have gone, there are others who have come in, but the obligation on DPC as part of that 50 remit is three.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Overall?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Overall, yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Net, three?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Net, yes—which I appreciate might sound low, given the size of DPC relative to other government departments.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I fully understand. Did you manage to get the answer on the administered items?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We are just waiting for the split between the two. As soon as I get it, I will let you know; we can send off a text.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, continuing under the Workforce Summary heading, are you able to tell me or take on notice how many stress leave applications were approved in DPC over the last financial year?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I have received from the chief executive officer is that, off the top of his head, none immediately come to mind, but we are going to double-check that for you.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: If you could take that on notice that would be great.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am happy to take that on notice, yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, did the public sector commissioner identify morale problems in DPC in 2023-24 and bring that to any executive's attention?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised not that we are aware of, no—certainly between the commissioner and the chief executive, nor has the commissioner raised it with me. I would not say I meet with the commissioner on a frequent basis, but I certainly engage with her on a semiregular basis. She has never raised any such suggestion with me either, and I would expect her to, if there was an issue.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, are you able to advise how many staff have resigned from DPC over the last 12 months, how many were on contract and how many were ongoing?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: At hand, we only have who is coming and going in terms of directors but not across the entirety of DPC. How many FTEs do we have in DPC?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: About 600.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Six hundred, yes. I do not have those numbers across the whole thing, but we can take that on notice. We are happy to take that on notice.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, is the position of Deputy Chief Executive for Community, Culture and Place still vacant?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Could you just repeat the question so I get the answer right?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Is the position of Deputy Chief Executive for Community, Culture and Place still vacant? I believe that was the position previously occupied by Ms Alison Lloydd-Wright.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice that I have is that it is not vacant, it is still occupied by—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: As an acting role?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, as Ms Lloydd-Wright's last day in the office was yesterday and she has taken a couple of weeks' leave before her resignation takes effect. You may or may not be aware that Alison has resigned from that role as she intends to explore opportunities outside of government.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am very keen to put on the record my gratitude for Alison's service to the government, across different governments. The position will become vacant presumably when her leave concludes in a fortnight.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Do you intend to fill that position in its current form?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: That is under consideration.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Will someone act in that role?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I have received is not at this stage. The group will report through to Wayne Hunter while an assessment is made about what will happen to that position in the future.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I have a question here about whether it has been advertised, but presumably not, given it is under consideration whether to fill it or not?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It has not been advertised.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: When was the previous incumbent, Ms Alison Lloydd-Wright, appointed to the role and how long after that appointment did she indicate that she was going to leave?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I have received is that it was somewhere around October last year that she was appointed to the role. The second part of your question was: when did she announce her intention to resign?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes, but I think that was in the public domain—

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I found out a couple of weeks ago—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: —unless that was different from what was in the public domain?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It was 3 May.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Was the Deputy Chief Executive for Community, Culture and Place responsible for your department's dealings with the SA Museum restructure?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, she had a role—not exclusively, I think it is fair to say. The way it is structured is that the arts portfolios, or the arts units of government that report in through DPC, came in through Alison Lloydd-Wright's area, ultimately, and that includes the Museum.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Was she the primary executive responsible for the Museum within your department, excluding the chief executive of the Museum himself?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: As you have rightly identified, they have their own board and their own director, but in terms of the interface between that and the Department of the Premier and Cabinet it ultimately sort of escalates to Alison, yes, or to that office.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Did the previous deputy chief executive provide advice to the Premier's office regarding the South Australia Museum restructure and, if so, are you able to provide information regarding the nature of that advice?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that, principally, the interface with the cabinet architecture of government in this respect would be interaction with the responsible minister's office, which is of course the Minister for Arts. As is well-known, since the issues around the Museum were publicly orated and elevated in their concern and their attention, in no small part because of the work of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, naturally I did start to ask questions and seek advice myself and at that point there were interactions between me, in my office, and Alison Lloydd-Wright. It is no different to when an issue is raised; the Premier's office will seek to seek briefings from any government department on any particular issue and this is not an exception.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Did you know your staff get direct briefings from Ms Lloydd-Wright in terms of verbal briefings from her; did you meet with her about this issue?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: She was certainly present at meetings I had about this issue, absolutely. I do not mind saying, that was as it started to present itself as an issue, yes, I absolutely was in meetings with Alison Lloydd-Wright. I cannot remember a meeting that I had with her one on one, or just between me and a single staff member and Alison. We were trying to formulate a response to sort of intervene in what the board was executing. I guess there were a few important meetings between myself, the CEO of DPC, Alison, the minister and representatives of the Museum. We had meetings with representatives of people who were—let's call them the concerned citizens for the lack of a better term—and Alison was present and I was grateful for the advice that she offered through that process.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Does DPC do exit interviews with staff when they resign from their contracts or positions?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised, yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Would an exit interview have been undertaken with Ms Lloydd-Wright, or planned to be undertaken?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that that is something that should ordinarily occur, yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Has that yet happened?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Not in a formal sense as yet. I am advised that the chief executive of the department naturally had a rather lengthy briefing—not debriefing, meeting, discussion—with Ms Lloydd-Wright when she indicated that she intended to resign. Alison has been a high-quality public servant, so I would have thought that would have precipitated a conversation when the disappointing news of her resignation was made known.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: And I do not dispute her quality, Premier. She and I were both recruited to the Cabinet Office in the same interview round in 2008. I will move on to my next question. Does the Premier's office or the Premier's Delivery Unit have an ongoing involvement in the South Australian Museum restructure, including the review which is underway?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The PDU is not involved. What was the other part of the question?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Does the Premier's office, or the PDU, which you have clarified, have an ongoing involvement in the South Australian Museum restructure, including the review which is currently occurring?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The PDU definitely does not have any involvement; they have enough on their plate. I asked the Chief Executive of DPC to lead the exercise. That has been publicly announced. There is a panel of three: the Chief Scientist of South Australia along with Jim Thompson, who is the current director of the Queensland Museum. They are doing that work, and they will report through to me once that is concluded.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: When do you expect the review to be complete?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I think what we said publicly is we are trying to get a result as quickly as possible, and I think I referred to the second half of the year, but I do not mind saying that we are hoping that at some time in September there will be something we can take to cabinet.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: When that is complete, will you commit to releasing it publicly and in full?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We will certainly make known publicly the outcome of it, yes. There is still a fair bit of work to be done, I think it is fair to say, because there is the department of chief executive's role in terms of leading the examination and then we will, as a cabinet, have to contemplate whatever the outcome of that is. What we are seeking to achieve here is an outcome that best represents for the future of the Museum. I think any reasonable person would expect institutions to make sure they have got plans for the future.

I think the Museum sought to achieve that objective in a way that did not accord with what many people view as the best interests of the Museum. As I said, after I examined it myself, I think there was some legitimacy to those concerns. The exercise that the chief executive has, along with those two experts, is to come up with an alternative pathway for a plan for the future of the Museum. I have asked for that to come back through the cabinet. We will see where that lands.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Thank you for that answer. I will move on to the make-up of your office, Premier: Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 12, the ministerial office resources component on that page. Premier, can you table the job titles of all 46 FTEs in your ministerial office?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Can I table them?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Take it on notice, I guess.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I think it is all gazetted normally.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Are the specific job titles gazetted?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: From memory, I think they are, but I can check for you. What do you want us to take on notice?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The job titles of all 46 FTEs—the names and job titles.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice that I have received is that, as per the requirement and the usual practice, FTEs in my office, the names of those people and their titles, along with their salaries, is normally gazetted.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will move on then. Are any staff seconded to work in your office and, if so, how many and where from?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Seconded into my office?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes, from other parts of government or from other offices?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am happy to take that on notice again. In terms of what I can answer off the top of my head and the advice I have received, there are some people who are seconded into office administrative type roles, ASO related positions, into the office. I do not think there are any in terms of what you would normally characterise as ministerial advisers or anything like that.

That does happen potentially in some other offices. I can think of people who have been recruited from the department into those roles, but not into specific portfolios. I do not think there are any in my office.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Outside the 46 FTEs in your office, are there any other staff who are contracted to work in the office and, if so, how many and where from?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am not aware of any seconded contractors or people on contracts, but for the sake of absolute surety I am happy to take that on notice.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Thank you.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Not that I am aware of, no. Again, if that is wrong, I will come back, but I am advised there are none.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Do any of your staff work from home on an agreed basis? Not obviously after hours when you take messages and things like that, but work from home in the normal sense of that term and, if so, how often?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised there are two employees who have agreed arrangements to work one day a week from home.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, I will move on to the position of the Cross Border Commissioner at Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 14 which you referred to in your comments earlier around that position being MoG'd into—

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: What page?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Page 14. It is one of the positions referred to. Has the office of the Cross Border Commissioner, obviously not the commissioner but the position itself, been cut?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised no.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So both the commissioner and the office of the commissioner exist?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There is a physical office and therefore I guess an office in Mount Gambier with an EA role. My advice is there is the commissioner and then there is the supporting office around the commissioner, which is pretty small, but yes, both are being retained. Obviously, we are in the market at the moment. I think there is a process underway at the moment. There were interviews on Friday of last week for the recruitment of the new commissioner.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Was the funding for the office moved as part of machinery of government changes from PIRSA into DPC?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So that is part of the DPC operating budget now?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. I can be more specific. The allocated annual budget for the Cross Border Commissioner in 2024-25 is $525,000 and indexed ongoing. Expenditure by DPC to date on recruitment of a Cross Border Commissioner has been $24,208, which includes advertising the position, supported by a recruitment agency.

The annual budget for the Cross Border Commissioner in 2023-24 was $510,000. The effective transition date of the transfer of the Cross Border Commissioner from PIRSA to DPC was 11 April. Actual expenditure incurred by PIRSA in 2024 was $295,000 as of 10 April, so $215,000 has been transferred to DPC from PIRSA for the remainder of the costs associated with this financial year.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Why was the decision made to move it?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The previous Cross Border Commissioner, Liz McKinnon—I was very glad when she took up the role. When I heard that she left or was leaving, naturally I was quite surprised and disappointed. I rang her to touch base with her and asked her to provide me some frank and fearless views about the role and what could be done to make sure it is effective into the future. Her view was that many of the issues that constituents or complainants or whatever you want to call them raised with the Cross Border Commissioner actually related to PIRSA itself—not all, but quite a number.

I do not think I am compromising her confidence in the conversation we had. She suggested that given the nature of the role is across agencies—so they are issues with DIT, they are issues with PIRSA, and you could go on and on, with training and skills—it would be better for the role to have a central government location bureaucratically. I have to say I thought that made a bit of sense. I spoke to the local MP about it, I spoke to Damien about it and obviously the minister, hence the decision was made that it probably best sits within a central government agency, and it was a question of whether it was DTF or DPC—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I would say DPC is a far better idea, Premier.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, and given we want it to be viewed as a valuable agency rather than a source of savings, we thought DPC would be the better place to put it.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: It does say in that table that we referred to that there is no funding against it for 2024-25. Is that going to be topped up by PIRSA?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Which table are you looking at?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The table at the top of page 14; the second tranche of figures there has the budget including the transfer that you referred to, but then there is nothing against the Cross Border Commissioner for the forthcoming financial year. I am just trying to understand why that is the case.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: For 2024-25?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, that is a good question. I have been advised that if you look at that table, it starts by saying 'Reconciliation to agency net cost of providing services'. For the 2024-25 financial year, given that the whole of the Cross Border Commissioner is in DPC, it will mean that it is funded from DPC's—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: General.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, so as to the budget for the Cross Border Commissioner, which for 2025 is $525,000, I am advised that that $525,000 sits within the overall program 1 allocation of Premier and Cabinet policy, and that allocation is obviously $119 million.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: That makes sense, thank you.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: But I can say, to be specific, within that allocation, all functions that relate to the Cross Border Commissioner have a budget of $525,000 for the next financial year.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, you mentioned that there was a physical office in Mount Gambier and that it was staffed by an executive assistant role. Is that currently filled?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: An office manager.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: An office manager; is that currently filled? Is there a person in that role?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am happy to take that on notice.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Is the lease for the office of the Cross Border Commissioner, which I think sits at 27 Sturt Street, Mount Gambier, an ongoing lease, or can you advise when that lease will expire and whether there is an intention to renew that lease?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: That lease would have been with PIRSA and now it has been transferred across, so we do not have that advice at hand, but I am happy to take that on notice.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Who performs the legislated role of the Cross Border Commissioner currently since Ms McKinnon's resignation?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Who is acting? In the interim period, I appointed the CE of DPC.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: You mentioned that a recruitment process was ongoing and had interviewed, but a decision has not been made yet around an appointment?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Correct. There were interviews last Friday, so presumably I will receive advice in the not too distant future about the outcome of that process. There are three people on the recruitment panel whom we have appointed: the CE of DPC; an Executive Director of DPC, Jess Pisani; and Ian McDonnell. Ian is from Mount Gambier, of McDonnell & Sons, a leader. You probably know Ian. He is a leader in the Mount Gambier business community. For your benefit, I have just been advised that the lease for the Cross Border Commissioner office that you referred to is ongoing. Currently, the lease ends in 2026.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Would it be your intention, with the appointment of a new Cross Border Commissioner, to keep that physical office in Mount Gambier?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. I have made it clear in the recruitment process that it is very much our expectation that the Cross Border Commissioner resides in Mount Gambier—or the Cross Border Commissioner's office is in Mount Gambier, which clearly lends itself to the Cross Border Commissioner living in proximity.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Are you able to advise how broadly the role was advertised and how many regional newspapers featured the advertisement for the role? I do not expect you to have that specificity, but if you can provide that on notice, or maybe you do have the answer.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that the Cross Border Commissioner position was open on 12 April 2024. Job advertisements included national, South Australian and local publications—Fin Review, 'Tiser, The Border Watch—as well as the South Australian government I Work for SA website.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Do you plan to review the position, either now or when the new person takes the role, as in review the role and how it is working? You mentioned you had a conversation with Ms McKinnon and referred very openly to the repositioning of it within DPC.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We are committed to the position. In fact, the position is established under statute, so obviously we are fully committed to the position. In terms of its operations, being a new thing, yes, I think it should be subject to ongoing—not assessment but making sure that we are doing what we can. When I spoke to Liz and she made the suggestions that she did, I have to say with the value of hindsight maybe we would have just put it into DPC from the start but, like all things, it is easy to say with hindsight.

In the ordinary course of events, I would hope to fill this position in the not too distant future, and let that individual and their office run its course for a period to establish what might be improved into the future but, from my perspective as the person who is now the responsible minister, I will be catching up with the Cross Border Commissioner—like I catch up with other senior executives and positions accountable to me—on a semi-regular basis, and during the course of those discussions undoubtedly we will discuss what can be done to make sure the role is best equipped to be able to fulfil the objectives that we have.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Just to clarify, under the new arrangements and broader Public Service employment situation, do you employ this position, or will it be your chief executive?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The Governor is the final appointer.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Does the commissioner report to your chief executive or is it a direct reporting role to you?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I received is that under the work that has been done for the transition of DPC, it immediately reports in on a practical basis to Jess Pisani, who is an executive director in DPC, executive director of strategic engagement, but more substantially through to the CEO of DPC. I am the responsible minister, and given that it is a commissioner's type role, in the same way with the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment, on occasions I will naturally be meeting with them.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Just one final clarification: in terms of the advertisement of that role, was The Border Watch the only regional newspaper that that was advertised in?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I will take that on notice. The advice that I have was it listed those papers, but I do not know if that means it was only those papers. I will find out.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will move on from the Cross Border Commissioner now to the Premier's Delivery Unit: Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, program 5, page 26. The DPC website describes the function of the PDU as the following:

The government has established a Premier’s Delivery Unit (PDU) to ensure priorities are delivered on time and on budget and that any challenges are addressed early and resolved satisfactorily.

Is the Premier satisfied that the PDU is delivering the government's commitment to fix the ramping crisis early and satisfactorily?

The CHAIR: Premier, can I ask that you introduce your new adviser please.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Can I introduce Rik Morris, who is the CEO of the Premier's Delivery Unit. Can you ask your question again?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Your department's website says that the PDU has a role to ensure that the priorities of government are delivered on time and on budget, and that any challenges are addressed early and resolved satisfactorily. Are you satisfied that the PDU is delivering your commitment to fix the ramping crisis early and satisfactorily?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The government's commitment around addressing ramping was more than just a descriptor; it actually was underpinned by a huge amount of policy and effort and some rather specific commitments. People remember the headline, but there was a lot of detail that underpinned it. There were very specific commitments around the number of nurses we were going to recruit over attrition, very specific numbers about the ambo offices and doctors we were going to recruit over and above attrition, and some very specific commitments around what investments were going to be made at specific hospitals—Flinders, Modbury, Mount Barker, Noarlunga, Lyell Mac. Then we went into some very highly granular detail around where we were going to put new stations, where crews were going to increase at stations, and where stations were going to be redeveloped.

The PDU does have a role in the monitoring of each of those individual commitments that were put on the public record that, quite reasonably, the government is held to account for. That is work that the PDU updates me on on a regular basis, along with a subcommittee of cabinet that we have established called the Government Performance Cabinet Committee. The members of that cabinet committee are myself, the Deputy Premier and the Treasurer. The PDU frequently reports in through that cabinet committee, elevating issues where any of those specific commitments might be struggling or where we are at in terms of times, budgets and so forth.

That exercise has actually proven to be quite useful. I could think of examples where, through that cabinet architecture, we have been able to make relatively quick decisions, particularly around dollars and where certain things might go. So, for instance, one of the commitments was the new ambulance headquarters. That is a big program and one that has been long overdue. As I know the Leader of the Opposition, being a former minister himself, appreciates, some of these things have complexity, but through that exercise we have been able to make decisions to hopefully meet the time lines that we have committed to. So, yes, there has been a lot of work that has gone into it.

Your focus, quite rationally, is on the end game—as is ours, I have to say—around what is happening with transfer-of-care data or numbers or ramping hours. Yes, of course we want to see a dramatically improved performance than is currently the case, but the underpinnings of the policy to expand and increase the capacity of the hospital system and the very specific nature of those commitments—which do not represent the entire effort of government, I have to say, but they do represent the commitments that we made—the PDU does have a role of monitoring that.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Is fixing the ramping crisis the biggest priority for the PDU?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It is certainly a priority of the government, and a lot of effort is going into it. The PDU's job is to monitor all of our election commitments, the specific ones in nature, and make sure they are being delivered against. It is my expectation of the PDU that they are all monitored and assessed. That is work that they do with a degree of diligence that I am grateful for.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I do not expect a specific answer on this, but are you able to estimate a proportion of the budget and the time in terms of FTE divisions that the PDU spends on addressing issues around ramping?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: In terms of roughly across FTEs, I am advised that all those Health commitments that I mentioned—and there are lots that I have not—does take up, I would be suggesting, over half, but approximately half of the time of the PDU, which sounds like a lot given the scope of the policy commitments that we made at the election, but there was a disproportionately large number of them in the Health area.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: It takes up about half the time, you said, give or take. Does it take up about half the FTEs as well?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There are seven FTEs in the PDU. Some of our commitments in Health are workforce related, other commitments are infrastructure related, so there is a bit of a split in terms of how that is divvied up. Of those seven FTEs, it is not structured as though 'these two are Health' or 'these three are Health'. It is spread across, depending on the nature of the commitment. So across all the FTEs and all the hours worked—ballpark—approximately half of it is spent on Health-related policy commitments.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: How does the PDU practically oversee SA Health and fixing the ramping crisis and other Health matters? Are there weekly meetings, daily meetings or conversations?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Just to go back a step, you have to appreciate the role of the PDU. The PDU is not to oversee the Health department, the PDU's responsibility is not to make any decisions within Health; the PDU's responsibility is to monitor the delivery of the commitments that have been made in regard to Health and every other agency. To give you a specific example, and one that is in my electorate: we committed to a new ambulance station in the Woodville area—no different to Norwood or any of the other different ambulance stations.

The PDU's job is to make sure that the Ambulance Service within SA Health—have they picked that site on time? Is the money being allocated for the site? How is it going in terms of its time line, because we have to get that open and running within a specific time frame. So it is a monitoring exercise, but then it also has the capacity to engage with the department to make sure things are moving at the pace they should be and are able to take decisions and bring them into that cabinet architecture I described earlier, to be able to make decisions where choices need to be made in a more expedited time frame.

As the Leader of the Opposition, you had election commitments that you were responsible for the delivery of. Let's take the reservoirs piece. I am familiar with the fact that that would have taken a heap of work. It is not just a decision, there is actually a whole range of decisions that have to be made in order to be able to achieve the outcome. This is that: this is providing a vehicle, a mechanism, so that I am advised and decisions can be made on a quick basis specific to the commitments that we have made.

Rik is not the person who is ultimately responsible for fixing ramping; that is ultimately SA Health's responsibility. The PDU's job is to make sure that where specific commitments have been made they are being delivered upon, and any interventions and actions that are required anywhere within government to ensure time frames are being met—that that is done; and also to monitor budget.

It is obvious that there is a massive escalation in the cost of infrastructure delivery. Where a project looks like it requires more funding allocation in order to be able to be delivered, then the PDU has the capacity to be able to identify that and escalate it through the budget process so that, if it needs to be addressed, it is.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Premier, you mentioned that fixing the ramping crisis as a commitment would have lots of things that sit under it in a practical sense: infrastructure, personnel, services, programs and the like. Does the PDU monitor and potentially intervene in those programs or do you see its role as honing in on the commitment to fix the ramping crisis, or a bit of both?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Honing in on the specifics, because the specifics are what we put in place in order to be able to achieve the objective we are looking for. The PDU is not a decision-making authority. The PDU does not have the power to instruct SA Health—far from it. The PDU has the capacity to extract information from SA Health or any other agency, and we are focusing on Health for the sake of the discussion, to be able to advise me as Premier of issues that are presenting themselves and suggested interventions that the PDU has no power or authority to make, only powers or authorities that exist in other parts of the government.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: As part of its work to identify problems and challenges and projects under that ramping crisis headline, does the PDU receive data and does it receive information on ramping on a regular basis beyond what is made public?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The PDU is an extension of me in some respects, answering to me directly, but not beyond the information that the Minister for Health gets. The Minister for Health and the Department for Health are the ones that generate reports and indicators, and I get access to some of those. I get a weekly update. I speak to the Minister for Health on a highly frequent basis, as you would imagine. I get access to data and reports and so forth that I try to avail myself of, but there is not any sort of specific PDU-designed report per se, it is just getting access to the information that is being generated in any event.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Are you happy with the performance of the PDU?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am, yes. This is something that we thought about for a while. Again, any observer of government and politics knows that governments, particularly new governments, make commitments and then often they get bogged down in process which compromises the aspirations of the government and their delivery. That happens across governments of all political persuasions.

There have been various iterations of Premier's Delivery Unit equivalents around the world. Some have worked with more success than others. We looked very closely at what the Blair government did, and thought it was a worthwhile approach and adapted it to the South Australian context—it is far more modest in its nature, I think it is fair to say. It has had a value, yes. I do not want to be partisan about it, but, without being specific, I can think of former governments that made some big promises that evaporated upon their election. We are working our hardest to avoid that, and that is where the PDU has had an important role to play, from my perspective.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Has the Premier received complaints about the behaviour of the PDU in the way that it oversees timelines and budgets and deals with public sector agencies?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No. The only complaints I can think of in respect to the PDU have probably come from me to the PDU about, 'Where is this at, where is that at, why isn't this done yet?' Outside of that, I have not been advised on any.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The opposition has been told of significant power struggles between the PDU and some of the agencies that it is speaking to about particular projects. Has the Premier had to intervene on behalf of the PDU to get things done?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I am not aware of those things, but can I just say this: say there is an issue with a particular commitment that we are trying to follow up on—a local sporting club having something built or the retirement of an infrastructure project, or you name it—there are countless—a piece of legislation that we committed to, whatever. Whatever the commitment, the PDU's job is to ruffle a few feathers if things are not going the way that are consistent with my expectations. Knowing the CEO and having observed his style, he probably does not ruffle feathers as much as I might like. No-one has advised me of any specific power struggles that are debilitating in nature.

Like I said, the job of the PDU is not just to go along and politely say, 'Where's this at?' And the department responding by saying, 'Oh, well, we're just going about it our way, thanks very much,' and then we pack our bags and go home; quite the opposite. The whole creation of the role is to generate a degree of accountability within the system to the political architecture of government. You appreciate this: the government is, and bureaucracy is, a big beast. It is unwieldy, and part of the challenge for political leaders is to grab hold of the reins to make sure that things you want to get done are getting done. I am unapologetic about those expectations.

I am very grateful for the fact that at the executive leadership of government, which is where I have an interaction, are acting with a degree of determination to fulfil the government's policy, particularly the CEO role, where I have a direct line of reporting accountability, but beyond that I am pretty grateful for it generally as well. The PDU has performed an important role. I do not want to wake up one day and see time pass us by and we have not been able to get done the things we want to get done.

It is tough. I do not want to ramble, but government departments have got jobs to do, they have services to deliver. There is just the day-to-day grind of doing the work of government. Part of the trick is to make sure that we have the capacity as a government to not just do those things but also to do the other things that represent the ambition of a program. Getting that balance right, or understanding how to do both, is one of the reasons why we established the PDU.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: There are seven FTEs in the PDU at the moment. Beyond that, does the PDU use contractors or consultants?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Obviously, it has in the past, as you inquired about with Mr Peter Hanlon, but there are none currently.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So Mr Hanlon is not continuing to consult the PDU?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So that relationship is no longer in place?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, not in a financial way, but that is not to say it could not be in the future. To be more specific about it, there has been zero expenditure on Mr Hanlon in 2023-24.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Would costs associated with contractors and consultants in the forthcoming financial year or in the past be captured in the line item supplies and services?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: What page are you looking at?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: That is page 26, the PDU page. It is $400,000 in the current financial year and $376,000.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. My advice is that is where it would be accounted for.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: And that is the line that Mr Hanlon would have been paid for—and, not specific, but other consultants as well?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: My advice is yes, that is correct.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will move on now to the Office for AUKUS in Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 16, highlights and targets. The establishment of the Office for AUKUS was listed as a highlight for the past year with $800,000 allocated towards the establishment of that office. What has funding been used for?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The Office of AUKUS was established post my first trip to Barrow. The AUKUS opportunity is obviously very big. Something I have been trying to impress upon the government is that it cuts across—everyone should feel as though they have a degree of responsibility in its delivery so there needs to be a degree of coordination. There also needs to be a bureaucratic interface for the commonwealth as well. That is why it has been established.

In terms of some of the things that it has done in the practical sense of its establishment has been very valuable to the government. What has taken up a lot of time, probably more than I would have thought was required, was around the land swap. That has been a challenging bureaucratic exercise.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The commonwealth is involved.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, exactly. I thought we were making it complicated and then the commonwealth got involved. That has taken a huge amount of work, but also it has had responsibilities in terms of the implementation of the defence industry workforce and skills plan that came out of that taskforce. The land swap, all that exercise, is now largely concluded. There are a few administrative things that have to be done for me now, but now it is more a tick-boxing exercise from here. That has freed up a lot of time.

Now the effort tends to go more towards engagement with the commonwealth around the training and skills academy, which is the priority that we have identified as a government that we want to get moving on and something I am in regular contact with Vice Admiral Mead for and about, amongst other efforts within government. Also anything that requires a cross-government coordinative sort of function, that sort of sits within the Office of AUKUS too.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Is there an allocation of FTEs for the office or are staff seconded from relevant agencies, or is it a combination?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Reading from the advice I have been given, the establishment funding currently funds three FTEs and will fund five FTEs from 2024-25 onwards. An additional 1.4 FTEs has been provided to the Office of AUKUS from within the DPC resources budget during 2023-24 to support the priority project.

The Office of AUKUS contains the following roles: Director of Office of AUKUS, Project Director—and I can tell you what their levels are, if you want. SAES 1 for the director; for the project director, MAS 3—that is a .4 FTE role—a program manager, who is an ASO 7, that is one FTE; a principal policy and project adviser, who is an ASO 7 and one FTE; and then there is one FTE of an ASO 2—one executive officer who is an ASO 2 and that is one FTE. The Office for AUKUS has provided funding of $135,000 in the current financial year and per annum for the three years beyond that to DIS which is now DSD.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: What involvement does Defence SA have with the Office for AUKUS?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Close collaboration.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: They are close?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, close collaboration. As you would expect, when we had a machinery of government change post the reshuffle, in that reshuffle we obviously moved the portfolio of the Minister for Defence and Space Industries. At the same time, just through coincidence, there was the resignation of Richard Price—and I put on record my thanks to him in his role at Defence SA for some time across governments. When Richard resigned, we appointed the new CE. Matt Opie, who I think the opposition probably knows, has now been appointed to that role.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We did contemplate whether that was a time we would want to move the Office for AUKUS. We decided against it for the reasons that I touched on earlier about it having a cross-government role, but it is my absolute firm expectation—and the minister and I have spoken about this in some detail—that those two things work hand in glove.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Does the office have a physical presence?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It is in the State Admin.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Does the Office for AUKUS have a reporting relationship with the commonwealth government regarding the AUKUS partnerships? Perhaps that is the wrong word—rather, information sharing. Are there strong relationships between them?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, absolutely. Mainly with ASA.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: None of these questions are meant to be criticism at all, by the way. What would you say has been achieved by the office since its establishment?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Undoubtedly the land swap would be the big thing. Also, they are developing a new master plan for Lefevre Peninsula:

supporting the commonwealth and state environmental and planning assessment process with a construction yard, which I suspect you, Leader of the Opposition, would have an appreciation that that is a big piece of work;

partnering with the ASA to grow social licence for the submarine program across state and national levels, including local and international defence industry partners;

supporting the implementation of the Defence Industry Workforce and Skills Plan, which I referred to earlier, including the allocation, to give a specific around that;

working with the commonwealth and our universities in South Australia around how the allocation of the 1,000 commonwealth supported places is done; and

coordinating engagement with community, industry and other stakeholders on infrastructure workforce and legislative elements of the commonwealth program.

I suspect there will be other instances where governments—this government and potentially future governments—have to contemplate other legislative changes that might have to come in from time to time. The Leader of the Opposition would be aware of legislation that this parliament has passed—with bipartisan support, I note—to do a few things on Lefevre Peninsula. It would not surprise me if there is a need for that again in the future and the Office for AUKUS does that work. To drive partnership between the commonwealth and the state, the Office for AUKUS is also establishing a formal governance model within the ASA. The model will drive key partnership activities, including the industrial capability uplift, infrastructure, skills and training academy, social licence and communications.

What I would say in terms of my observation and having talked to Vice Admiral Mead about this is that there needs to be an interface between the South Australian government and the commonwealth, more specifically the ASA, to get a few things happening. The Office for AUKUS is our first iteration of that effort. It has obviously gone up a little bit as the work goes up a little bit, but we are just beginning here. This effort is going to grow and, I think, rapidly escalate as we get closer to the end of the decade and the program starts ramping up.

Let me put it this way: we will continue to monitor the structure of the Office for AUKUS and examine if this is the best way to do this, having something sitting within DPC, or if it requires something more substantial again. At the moment, we think it is probably about right, but I do not mind saying that Vice Admiral Mead and I have discussed thinking about how that interface looks into the future.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: You have mentioned the land swap being a big component of the work. The skills academy: is that the part with the transfer of funds to DIS, to look after the skills academy, driving that forward, or does that also sit within the Office for AUKUS?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: DIS has done the bulk of the work around how the skills and training pieces look, but yes is the short answer to your question. There is that collaboration between the Office for AUKUS and DIS, particularly where the Office for AUKUS facilitates the engagements with the commonwealth on this.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will move on from the Office for AUKUS now and talk about government land, which is Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 34 and the statement of financial position. The item that I want to refer to is 'Land and improvements'. The balance sheet on page 34 shows an increase in land and improvements of around $178 million, with funding significantly increasing from $224 million in 2023-24 to just over $400 million in the 2024-25 financial year. What is this very significant increase due to?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Well, I do not think it is State Admin.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: No. I am not sure it is worth that much. You would have to pay someone to take it.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: If Treasury have made that estimation, I would assert that is ambitious. Anyway, we will find out.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will ask a related question. Have any funding contingencies or allocations been made for relocating staff from the State Admin Centre to the second Festival Tower, and is this reflected in the department's financial statements and, if so, where?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, absolutely not.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Has any expenditure been allocated in the 2024-25 budget or the 2023-24 estimated result regarding any aspect of the second Festival Tower?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, not that I am aware of.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Are there any plans—and we did refer to the State Admin Centre a moment ago—to move DPC or the Department of Treasury and Finance and other government agencies from that building?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Apart from, in machinery of government, there might be small functions moving from—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes, but you intend the State Administration Centre to be the home of those two agencies, so to speak?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There are no plans currently for those agencies to be moving holus-bolus out of State Admin. But I do not mind saying this, at some point that is probably going to have to happen.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: You will probably get bipartisan support in some form.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: You know this: in most other agencies within government, the accommodation is well and truly superior to the accommodation—do not get too excited—for DPC and DTF. That is I think pretty well-known. It is an old building. Where we park our cars out the back, it feels as though there is a permanent line-up of Rawsons Electrical vehicles or some plumbing vehicles.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Fixing things.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. The lifts seem to be having to get repaired every five minutes. It is just an old building and at some point someone is going to have to do it eventually and how that works, I do not know. I think some options have been looked at, and they have been for years, as I understand it, but no decisions have been made. There are other departments that have a residual presence in the building, I think—the Auditor-General and so forth. If we had the aspiration for state governments to be in green-star rated buildings and so forth, then we are well and truly failing that benchmark or that test. But to answer your question, there has been no decision made by the government to move DPC or DTF as things stand today.

In terms of land and improvements, my advice is that this looks as though it is the function of a valuation. I might have to take this on notice to understand what that variation is. I will have to take that on notice.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Have any sale proceeds from the sale of the State Administration Centre, or the precinct within which it sits, including the education centre and Torrens House, been included in the forward estimates?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There is no anticipated sale.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: No anticipated sale?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, not that I am advised, unless Treasury has done something. That is probably a question best asked next door, but my advice is no.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I will move on to Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 42, the additional administered items for Department of the Premier and Cabinet, with a particular focus in these few questions on motorsport, which is included there. Which minister does the South Australian Motor Sport Board report to?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The Premier.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: To you. Have you received a report from the Motor Sport Board for the 2023 event, held between 23 and 26 November?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Can I just introduce Mark Warren, who is the CEO of the Motor Sport Board. Sorry, what was your question again?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I believe that there is a requirement for a report from the Motor Sport Board summarising or analysing each of the events held, and have you received a report for the 2023 event?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Are you talking about the economic outcomes report and so forth?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Yes. I think there is a requirement for it to be tabled in parliament as per the act.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I have received is that there is a requirement to table the attendance and so forth, those particulars. I am advised that has happened.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: It has happened for 2023? I was under the impression it had not been. I stand to be corrected of course.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We will double-check, too, for assuredness. I am advised that under section 27D(1) of the act the board is required to prepare and provide to me, as the responsible minister, a report setting out the total attendance at the event and have that laid before both houses of parliament. The report set out that the total attendance over the four days of the 2023 Adelaide 500 event was estimated to be 260,700.

Beyond that official report, I am advised, and I am assuming this has been put out recently, or soon, that the event for 2023 contributed $61.6 million in economic benefit to the state, which was a 19 per cent increase on 2022, and generated $111.3 million in economic expenditure to this state's economy. When I got those numbers, naturally my first question was, 'Where does that uplift come from?' We did better this year in terms of accommodation, particularly on the Saturday night, than what the first year was. That was to be anticipated because you recall that the dates for the 2022 event were not announced until July.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So people had more time to plan.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: So the market had 12 months to book and, of course, on the Saturday night we also had Robbie Williams, which helped too.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: You mentioned the attendance. Was that all paying guests or does that also include complimentary tickets? Are you able to give a breakdown of that? If not now, can you take that on notice?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The advice I have been given is that attendance does include a range of people, so it does also include officials, credentialled ticketholders for people like teams, drivers, participants, corporate and media. They are all included. Apparently, that is a standard that is set across all Supercars events, that those people are included.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Are you able to give a breakdown of numbers—not today, but to take that on notice—of how many complimentary tickets versus paying tickets?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We can have a look at it. There are certainly some complimentary tickets.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I think school students and others got those.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. The advice I have received is that certainly less than 5 per cent of all ticketing is complimentary, and the vast bulk of that 5 per cent is 3,000 school students who are given an opportunity to come along.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: How long does the sponsorship agreement with VAILO continue for? Is this the last year of that?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: This is the last year and there is an option for an additional two-year extension.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Given the revelations about the founder of VAILO's behaviour, in particular around not paying his taxation requirements, is the government concerned about that and does it plan to continue that sponsorship?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We are not concerned about it. I do not mind saying that having had the opportunity to speak to Aaron Hickmann on a number of occasions, his commitment to the event is something that we are very grateful for as a government. He has been a high-quality corporate partner of the event. All of the obligations he has under the sponsorship agreement with the Motor Sport Board and the Adelaide 500 he has honoured in full. In fact, I think there are examples where, in terms of other things, he has gone above and beyond.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: So there are no late payments of sponsorship or anything like that?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: No, and I have asked. To be specific, I can advise that certainly VAILO have no outstanding invoices under their partnership agreement with the event. Supporters of the Supercars event in Adelaide and the Adelaide 500—and clearly the government is a keen enthusiast of the event—have no reason for any complaints, only, really, gratitude towards Mr Hickmann and VAILO's support of the event.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: With regard to the option of continuing that sponsorship by VAILO, are negotiations underway?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I think there have been some really positive discussions, but nothing has been officially decided yet. Those discussions are underway.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I might pass now to Mr Batty to read in the omnibus questions. He was desperate to do so, and it will give us a break from these questions for a moment.

Mr BATTY: I will read the omnibus questions.

1. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many executive appointments have been made since 1 July 2023 and what is the annual salary and total employment cost for each position?

2. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many executive positions have been abolished since 1 July 2023 and what was the annual salary and total employment cost for each position?

3. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what has been the total cost of executive position terminations since 1 July 2023?

4. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, will the minister provide a breakdown of expenditure on consultants and contractors with a total estimated cost above $10,000 engaged since 1 July 2023, listing the name of the consultant, contractor or service supplier, the method of appointment, the reason for the engagement and the estimated total cost of the work?

5. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, will the minister provide an estimate of the total cost to be incurred in 2024-25 for consultants and contractors, and for each case in which a consultant or contractor has already been engaged at a total estimated cost above $10,000, the name of the consultant or contractor, the method of appointment, the reason for the engagement and the total estimated cost?

6. For each department or agency reporting to the minister, how many surplus employees are there in June 2024, and for each surplus employee, what is the title or classification of the position and the total annual employment cost?

7. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what is the number of executive staff to be cut to meet the government's commitment to reduce spending on the employment of executive staff and, for each position to be cut, its classification, total remuneration cost and the date by which the position will be cut?

8. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

What savings targets have been set for 2024-25 and each year of the forward estimates;

What is the estimated FTE impact of these measures?

9. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

What was the actual FTE count at June 2024 and what is the projected actual FTE account for the end of each year of the forward estimates;

What is the budgeted total employment cost for each year of the forward estimates; and

How many targeted voluntary separation packages are estimated to be required to meet budget targets over the forward estimates and what is their estimated cost?

10. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how much is budgeted to be spent on goods and services for 2024-25 and for each year of the forward estimates?

11. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many FTEs are budgeted to provide communication and promotion activities in 2024-25 and each year of the forward estimates and what is their estimated employment cost?

12. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what is the total budgeted cost of government-paid advertising, including campaigns, across all mediums in 2024-25?

13. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, please provide for each individual investing expenditure project administered, the name, total estimated expenditure, actual expenditure incurred to June 2023 and budgeted expenditure for 2024-25, 2025-26 and 2026-27?

14. For each grant program or fund the minister is responsible for, please provide the following information for the 2024-25, 2025-26 and 2026-27 financial years:

Name of the program or fund;

The purpose of the program or fund;

Budgeted payments into the program or fund;

Budgeted expenditure from the program or fund; and

Details, including the value and beneficiary, or any commitments already made to be funded from the program or fund.

15. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

Is the agency confident that you will meet your expenditure targets in 2024-25?

Have any budget decisions been made between the delivery of the budget on 6 June 2024 and today that might impact on the numbers presented in the budget papers which we are examining today?

Are you expecting any reallocations across your agencies' budget lines during 2024-25; if so, what is the nature of the reallocation?

16. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

What South Australian businesses will be used in procurement for your agencies in 2024-25?

What percentage of total procurement spend for your agency does this represent?

How does this compare to last year?

17. What protocols and monitoring systems has the department implemented to ensure that the productivity, efficiency and quality of service delivery is maintained while employees work from home?

18. What percentage of your department's budget has been allocated for the management of remote work infrastructure, including digital tools, cybersecurity, and support services, and how does this compare with previous years?

19. How many procurements have been undertaken by the department this FY, how many have been awarded to interstate businesses? How many of those were signed off by the CE?

20. How many contractor invoices were paid by the department directly this FY? How many and what percentage were paid within 15 days, and how many and what percentage were paid outside of 15 days?

21. How many and what percentage of staff who undertake procurement activities have undertaken training on participation policies and local industry participants this FY?

The CHAIR: Member for Hartley, I understand you have some questions.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Thank you, sir.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Can I just get back to a couple of things that the Leader of the Opposition has asked for.

The CHAIR: Premier.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There were a couple of things that the Leader of the Opposition asked me for that I said I would follow up on. On page 13, early on, the Leader of the Opposition asked about FTEs—the two specific FTEs administered for the department. They are ministerial officers, and apparently it is the Premier himself and Minister Bettison. So Minister Bettison and myself individually are those two FTEs, and are counted that way for some reason. Just one other thing I want to point out—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: It is a bit quirky.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. I have a clarification in regard to something that was raised during the course of the PDU, and I do not know if this needs to be made, but it is just for the sake of transparency. You asked about consultants. There was a piece of work commissioned by the PDU by a consultant firm by the name of Australia Public Affairs in late 2022. That work was not completed until October 2023 and the invoice was settled at that point, and the value of that particular piece of work was $33,000.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: What did that relate to?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It was a piece of work assessing distinctions in the operation across jurisdictions of sex offender registers.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: I have a couple of questions in relation to Infrastructure SA, Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 23, highlights, where it says:

Progressed the business case for the Northern Water project and secured funding from private sector partners into the next phase of studies.

For the business case and the next phase of studies, where did that money come from, which parties were involved and what is the contribution of each of those parties to that business case and the next phase of studies?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I introduce Jeremy Conway, CEO of Infrastructure SA, as you would know. Are you talking about page 23?

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Yes.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Sorry, we have just had this movement here. You are talking about the—

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: The Northern Water project, in relation to the business case and the next phase of studies. It says that funding has been secured from private sector partners: which partners and how much?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: BHP, Amp Energy, Fortescue and Origin made a contribution.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Are we able to understand how much that contribution has been?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I think it is commercial-in-confidence, but what I would say is BHP has put the number out there, because we were at a forum together and we referred to it. From memory, that is $77.5 million.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: And the others are commercial-in-confidence; is that your answer? There is a difference between commercial-in-confidence and not wanting to publish the answer. I am not trying to be tricky, I am just trying to understand.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: They have asked for it to be kept commercial-in-confidence.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: They have asked for it to be kept commercial-in-confidence? Okay. On the same budget page, in terms of—

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: Can I just elaborate a little bit on the Northern Water feasibility study funding because it is important. It is a $200 million feasibility study: $77½ million of that is coming from BHP, $100 million is committed from the state government—this will allow you to deduce how much the others are paying—and we have now been able to secure $65 million from the federal government, which was not the case previously, so I was very grateful for that when it was announced in the budget. If you add all that up, what do you have? You have $165 million plus $77 million. The other contributors are smaller by nature. My apologies: the $65 million contributes to our $100 million. I should be clear about that.

The other critical thing, though, that I have made known publicly—and I am not sure the significance of this is fully appreciated—is that there are significant caveats upon the state government's contribution, namely that we were able to secure agreement with BHP that in the event that BHP, who would be the principal customer of the Northern Water project, walk away with a positive finding from the feasibility study, the state's contribution is at risk to BHP. This is something that I insisted upon, given the history of these types of projects in the past with BHP, but we are very grateful for their contribution and that work is happening in earnest.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: On the same page, under targets 2024-25—the big question. It states:

Continue progress on the Northern Water project towards the final investment decision.

When will that happen?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: We hope in 2026. We hope at some point in 2026.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Probably January, February, early March, maybe?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: That would be nice. A lot of things would be nice at that time of the year.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: It is a nice time of the year. I will hand back to the leader.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: People are out and about, there is an enthusiasm and thirst for public knowledge. In all seriousness, we are working towards 2026. It is a massive program. It is so big that it is hard to put a specific time on it.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: I just want to clarify one very small thing from my question on the Cross Border Commissioner, and you may not need to change officers for this. Obviously, there is the commission itself and there is an office manager EA role, which you took on notice whether it had someone in it or not. Are there any other FTEs associated with that role?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I have just been advised, since we last discussed it, the office manager role is also vacant, so presumably that will be getting filled by the new commissioner, when they are appointed. Not specifically per se, but, naturally, once the new person is appointed—

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: There may.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: There may be, yes.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: In our closing couple of minutes, I would like to ask a couple of quick questions about the Tarrkarri centre, the Aboriginal art centre, Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 15, 'Investing expenditure summary'. In the budget papers, $20 million was spent during the 2023-24 financial year on Tarrkarri. What is the status of the project?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: The government is very carefully assessing its options.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: In October, the Deputy Premier responded to a question in the house indicating the panel appointed to review the project—Ken Wyatt, Bob Carr and Carolyn Hewson—handed down their review in recent months. Are you able to say what the review recommended?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: It made a number of recommendations to government about the project. I think the most significant was that if you are doing it, you have to do it properly. That sounds sort of obvious on one level, but it also brings with it another degree of complexity around funding. What they are saying is that a modest version of it will not work in the way that the aspirations for that project have been set since, prior to this government.

There were forecast numbers, which I do not remember off the top of my head, but there were some pretty substantial forecast numbers about levels of visitation for Tarrkarri that were set by the former government. I think those numbers—they are big numbers. It was over a million people a year. That is a big number. I have to say that I do not mind the aspiration. I am not critical of the number. I think if we are doing this project you would love for there to be a million people a year who are going through it.

The advice that stood out to me—and I am saying this from memory—was that if you are going to get those numbers, it cannot be a modest proposition; it has to be shoot the lights out good. That is the challenge that we have before us. At the last election, Tarrkarri had bipartisan support. If Tarrkarri is pursued and invested in, I think it would be valuable if that was maintained. It would be unfortunate if a project of this nature, given the events of last year, somehow got conflated with that. That is certainly something that is in my mind. We are being methodical in the judgements that we have to make at a practical level but also in terms of a social licence as well.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Thank you, Premier.

The CHAIR: The time allocated having expired, I declare the examination of the State Governor's Establishment and Auditor-General's Department closed. The examination of the proposed payments for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet will continue on Tuesday. I would like to thank the Premier and his advisers. I also thank the opposition and members for their questions.

Sitting suspended from 11.00 to 11.15.