LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (15:32): Last week in this place I made some comments about the general meeting and showcase of local government in South Australia that was to take place last Thursday and Friday. Fortunately, I was able to spend a good part of Friday at the general meeting and at the lunch in discussion with local government friends from around South Australia who spoke about where they are going. I was left in no doubt about a number of concerns that local governments have about where the state government is taking them; in fact, more to the point, where it is not taking them.

They are saying that they were looking to the future, but they do not seem to be getting much ministerial direction or leadership on any potential changes on where they are going. They are most concerned about funding issues and where the money is coming from. They cannot rate their communities any higher, and that is tied in with the imposts that have been placed upon them in collecting both waste and NRM levies. Indeed, a motion about the issue of the NRM levies was put at the general meeting, as councils are quite concerned.

One council mentioned that the NRM board in its area had raised the levy by some 300 per cent; whereas, if they try to stick up their rates 1 per cent or 2 per cent, they get hounded. I acknowledge that the NRM levies were set by legislation in this place. Local governments are now saying that they were conned, and, unfortunately, they seek to redress this and have another look at it.

Those issues, the excessive bureaucratic imposts and demands from state government departments, and the extra load that is being required to be carried by local governments are really starting to make their impact quite heavily on the local government sector without any sort of recompense from the state government.

It is also interesting to note that it appears that the sticky fingers of the Labor Party are trying to get into local government, and they are trying to manipulate and push in no greater an area than that of the proposal for an ICAC. The Attorney-General is dead-set frightened poopless about this. He is trying to indicate to local government—

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: On a point of order, Madam Acting Speaker, my question to you is: is the term 'frightened poopless' parliamentary?

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Breuer): Perhaps the Attorney could give us a definition of what 'poopless' means.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: I think the gravamen of the member for Finniss's allegation is that a proposal is so frightening for another member of the house that it causes him to evacuate his bowels.

The ACTING SPEAKER: I do not think there is a point of order. It is colourful but allowed.

Mr PENGILLY: It is interesting that the Attorney-General puts that connotation on it. I ask whether the Attorney-General believes in reincarnation, because it is highly likely he would come back as a sphincter.

These things are concerning to local government and they are looking for a way forward. What does this government propose in the way of reform? What does it propose in the way of change to accommodate the needs and requirements of local government in South Australia? I think it is most disappointing that we have seen nothing forthcoming from the current minister or the government, and I think it is a disgrace that we have seen nothing happen in six years.

I put the question: is it correct that the government is looking to delay the local government elections in 2010? That is something that has been thrown around the place in the local government sector. They have been treated with disdain and contempt; they are not getting any money; extra things are being thrown on them and, quite frankly, it is outrageous and it should not be allowed.

Time expired.