TRAMLINE EXTENSION

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (15:05): My question is to the Minister for Transport. Will the minister advise what impact the proposed tram extension to Port Road will have on traffic flows between the city and Hindmarsh Bridge at Thebarton, and will it take out an entire lane of traffic?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (15:05): The Leader of the Opposition was recently at the civil construction federation awards (I think) where he had the pleasure of handing an award to one of our projects, the Bakewell Underpass. I note that one of the other projects nominated but, unfortunately, while in the finals, not given an award, was also the tram extension. These, of course, are not judged by us. The reason I mention this is that what was demonstrated has been the approach we take with contractors in these arrangements, getting into early contractual arrangements, just like I might say with the Anzac Highway underpass, which, before completion, has already won an award for design.

That is the reason that, when we go out with these jobs and with those arrangements with the contractor, we expect to get the best possible use of their expertise and innovation in the final design of the project. That is what you do. What I do not do is sit in my office, look at a drawing of the road and decide how I would like it to go. I can only say that that approach has proved to be very successful.

Mr Goldsworthy: Answer the question.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I am just trying to explain to you—

Mr Williams: You are spending hundreds of millions of dollars and you do not know what is going to happen.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I know what is going to happen; I know exactly what is going to happen: we are going to have a tram extension to the Entertainment Centre. We are going to do that in a very sensitive way in managing traffic, just like we have done—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I note that, on the question of tram extensions—don't worry, I have a long answer for you on this one—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Can I say, sir, haven't they demonstrated themselves to be so rude today? Could it be that they have seen the poll and, after all the hyperactivity of the Leader of the Opposition, mid term they have gained a per cent from an historic thrashing a couple of years ago? Mid term they have gained a per cent, which, of course, the Leader of the Opposition would tell me would get him how many seats?

Mr Koutsantonis: None.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: So, no wonder they are a bit rankled today; no wonder they are all a little unhappy. I heard the Leader of the Opposition saying that the member for Davenport is welcome to go—I am not surprised by that, after all—because the by-election will be a test of the leadership of Mike Rann. We want that Davenport seat back because we last held it—I don't recall, I don't think we ever have. It will be a test of someone's leadership, all right, especially with that poll we just saw. But we will have difficulties, won't we, because when we call the two preselections in Davenport and Mayo, we will have people backstabbing each other, fighting, spilling blood—oh, no, that's them; that's right. No wonder they are all a bit rankled today. I just had to say it: it has been a bit dull, hasn't it?

Mr Koutsantonis: Have you put it on your website, Marty?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: They have not got the new poll up on their website, I note. The tram extensions are something with which the opposition will endlessly play politics. I point that out—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: And, of course, we get the forced laughter from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Vicki Chikerovski. The reason I say that is that I have very good grounds, and I say that seriously in explaining this question. Of course, in 1997, under John Olsen, they promised us a tram extension north of Victoria Square. As soon as we announced it, they opposed it. They announced they are going to build a tram extension to Football Park. Of course, as soon as we announce it, they oppose it. I note that in the Messenger this week (and he is not here) the member for Morphett has joined with his leader, even though he supported it previously, to oppose all the tram extensions but thinks one to the airport might be a good idea. Of course, no tram or train extension in Australia going to an airport has worked, but it is a better idea than anything we thought of.

I say all that so that members understand what is going on with tram extensions. The truth is that very good ideas by this government would be opposed, plainly and only, because they are very good ideas of this government. We are going to be extremely sensitive to traffic management and I am extremely confident that the tram extension will sit very easily. And we have a few ideas, but I will not tell the opposition what those ideas are ahead of a final—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: It is so tiring. What I will say is this, Mr Speaker. They have been inventing stories that there has not been a study into this. There have been endless studies since 2005. But I would point out—

Ms CHAPMAN: I have a point of order, Mr Speaker. Surely some leniency has been allowed. The minister has got onto everything else except answering the question about how many lanes will close.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Minister for Transport.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I am very confident that traffic management on this piece of road will sit very nicely with our tram extension. It is a very good idea. I believe that luminaries such as Rob Gerard think it is a good idea. However, he is not always right. He has backed some shocking losers in the past, but I think he is right on this one.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I hate Gerard—why do you say that? I have had very civil meetings with Rob Gerard every time I have seen him, and quite recently. We take a new approach with Rob: we try to show him the error of his ways. Mr Speaker, the bottom line is this: these people had an opportunity in 2006 on the tram extension—a very clear point of difference. They went out and opposed it—something that, of course, they had promised to build earlier. They opposed it because we were doing it and we support it, clearly unequivocally. Well, the results speak for themselves.

So, all I say to the member for Kavel when he is trying to make these points is this: you will have another opportunity. We will go to the election with this very clear plan, and you can oppose it again, and I am very confident the result will be similar. But, regarding the notion that keeps being promoted that these are not planned, the best thing I can say is: I invite you to go and look at the work done by the property council. Now they are all pretending they are not interested, and we will get fake laughter from the member for MacKillop at any moment. Go and look at the work that was done by the property council, completely independently. Go and look at the work that was done completely independently by the peak property group of South Australia and, lo and behold, it looks spookily identical to that done by the government. That is because, when you go out and look at things objectively, in the best interests of the economy and the state, you get similar answers.

So, we will proceed. We know we will suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous oppositionists, but we will proceed because—

Mr Williams: Why won't you answer the question?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I will start again, if you like.

Mr Williams: Why won't you answer the question?

The SPEAKER: The member for MacKillop will come to order.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: There is a number of different ways in which the tram might interact with the traffic. We have considered some of them. We will be going to an early contracting arrangement, in all likelihood, and it will be the preferred method of procurement, one which has delivered us award winning results in the past. That is why I am not going to give the opposition any specifics of what will be where. We are going to take the—

Mr Williams: Yes, you know the disaster is coming.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The disaster is coming. It has already been called the tram to nowhere, just as they called the other one the tram to nowhere. It is a disaster coming. I just say again, you opposed our last tram before the election, you lost massively. You are going to oppose this one, you are going to lose massively. I truly enjoyed the poll results today. At this rate of turning around the vote you should be the government sometime in 2046. I have amused myself for long enough. I hope I have informed my colleagues. I cannot help the other side because, after all, you cannot put in what God left out, but I do hope all on this side are better informed.