RISTEC PROGRAM

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (14:50): My question is to the Treasurer. Why has the cost and time line of implementing his revenue management system (RISTEC) blown out from the $22.6 million approved by cabinet in July 2002 to $68.1 million, requiring a bailout of $45.5 million and a delay of five years? Does this failure reflect systemic problems in the governments ICT procurement program?

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Treasurer, Minister for Industry and Trade, Minister for Federal/State Relations) (14:50): It is true to say that the RISTEC program has taken longer and has cost more than one had initially hoped.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I have often made the point that sometimes in government we do not always get it right. That is the nature of government.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: The implementation of RISTEC will have a payback to taxpayers of enormous quantity. RISTEC—

Mr Griffiths: It will need to.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Correct; it will need to, given the investment that we are putting into it. That is why we are putting it in. RISTEC will enable us now to collect lawfully-owed taxes from a number of people who have otherwise been avoiding paying tax or have otherwise avoided proper assessment by government. There are factors of leakage under the old technology, where a number of taxpayers were leaking from the system by not being properly monitored and accounted for in government. That was a legacy issue from the last government; it was not something that the last government had put in place. My guess is, if I go back and look at the files, that the idea of RISTEC probably started under treasurer Lucas; if not, it certainly started in the very early part of my career.

I am happy to get for the house just how much extra money we expect to get from RISTEC once it is operating. I think it will be useful information. I would only be guessing, but I think it would be at least $10 million-plus, probably $20 million a year of extra revenue—probably even more than that. I will try to get that information for the house before question time ends. A substantial improvement in the quantity of lawfully-owed taxation revenue will be coming into the state Treasury—into consolidated revenue—for us to then spend on important government services.

RISTEC is a good initiative. It has taken longer and it is more expensive, but that is IT, unfortunately. It has been a very complicated process of procurement and design. I am sure that anyone who has been involved in IT—and I am sure in your career you too, Mr Speaker—would have had IT glitches from time to time. I know that under the last government there were many examples of IT programs costing much more than what was originally budgeted for.

The Hon. P.F. Conlon: The government radio network.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: The government radio network, for example. There are plenty of examples under the last government. One of the unfortunate realities of business is that IT costs are difficult for any entity—the government or the private sector—to contain at times. I will get those figures for the house as soon as I can.