House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Rail Electrification RAIL ELECTRIFICATION Mr PICCOLO House of Assembly Light RAIL ELECTRIFICATION Mr PICCOLO (Light) (14:40): My question is to the Minister for Transport. Can the minister respond to claims that the government has opposed rail electrification in the past and now supports it, and has the government's support for electrification instead been consistent and long standing? Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly Mr WILLIAMS: I rise on a point of order. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly Mr WILLIAMS: I am just wondering if the Minister for Transport is responsible to the house for claims, which is what the question was about. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I should not have to contend with interjections. The minister is responsible for rail electrification and that is the substance of the question. The Minister for Transport. The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly Elder Minister for Transport Minister for Infrastructure Minister for Energy The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (14:41): I am really not surprised that the opposition has not wanted to hear the answer to this question because I was listening to 891 this morning, as I regularly do, especially as our Deputy Premier and Treasurer was debating (I think debating is the term to use for what was going on) the Leader of the Opposition. I have to say that I was interested, but I was taken aback by some comments of the Leader of the Opposition. Of course, faced with the tremendous success of this government in dealing with the commonwealth and the first ever big investment in public transport by a commonwealth government as a result of this government's approach, you expect an opposition somehow to play that down, but I did not expect to hear what was said. The Leader of the Opposition said: We've been calling for the electrification of rail. We led the charge on that. The government said it couldn't be done and now they're doing it. An honourable member House of Assembly An honourable member: That's true! The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Okay, we will check the truth of this. We will go through the history of this, and we are very happy to do so. Then Kevin Foley, as astounded as I was to hear that, said, 'When did we say it couldn't be done?' Mr Hamilton-Smith replied, 'You scotched it down from the very beginning, time and time again.' I am not sure what 'scotched it down' means: is that watering down scotch, is it? But, faced with a tremendous success by this government, the Leader of the Opposition simply chose to engage in a failure of honesty again. I am not making a debating point. I want to refer to the facts and the history of rail electrification in South Australia. In 2004, of course, our Strategic Plan identified that we wanted an increase in public transport. In April 2005, we released the Infrastructure Plan. Among other things, it decided that we should investigate the electrification of the metropolitan rail network. Mr Williams House of Assembly Mr Williams: Investigate is the best you've ever done. The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Yes, investigate—that's all we've ever done. I will come back to you in a moment. Thank you, sunshine. We will come back to that in a moment to investigate it. Tenders were called for the provision of design services for investigating electrification in January 2006. We also did a feasibility study into the Seaford rail extension. The finding of that study was that it did not stack up then, but it did say that, if we resleepered and electrified, it would stack up. Of course, that is another little untruth that has been peddled today by the Leader of the Opposition. So we go on in the 2007-08 state budget: we committed substantial funds for resleepering, and we said in the Public Works Committee report on that resleepering, that the primary objective was to provide a platform for future upgrading of services, including making provision for future standardisation, increased service frequency and electrification. Apparently, we have knocked it off again and again. We scotched it down. I said in the parliament that the resleepering will, in future, allow electrification. Then, in the 2008-09 state budget we announced the electrification of our metropolitan rail lines, the biggest investment ever. Yesterday, for the first time ever, a commonwealth government committed that amount of money to a state public transport system—an outstanding success and a testament to our approach to work through it. Let me remind you that, of course, he said it was a feasibility study only. They led the charge; their 2006 rail transport policy was a feasibility study of electrification. Of course, that was about a year after we had already commissioned it but better late than never. Let us go back to— Members interjecting: The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Here we go! No; keep talking; I will wait. They called for an extension to Seaforth but we have not found Seaforth yet. Here is what he said this morning, 'We've been calling for the electrification of rail. We led the charge on that.' I have told you the time lines: 2005, 2007, 2008. But, of course, in January 2008 the Leader of the Opposition took his team to a love-in—and we use that term very euphemistically for a Liberal Party meeting—at Port Lincoln. He confirmed on the way there that they would not commit to electrification. Remember, they led the charge and we scotched it down over and over. Here is what he said: Electrification is one option that we are looking at, that we are costing, that we are considering. There are other options. When we've made our firm decisions and done our sums we will have more to say about that. That is the Leader of the Opposition leading the charge. Members interjecting: The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: He will say this is a pattern of behaviour. It is a failure of honesty. It is the same failure of honesty that has the Leader of the Opposition leaving on the record a claim that a Labor source gave him forged documents. That was not corrected. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! Mr HAMILTON-SMITH House of Assembly Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. In effect, he is calling me a liar and I ask that it be withdrawn. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I will entertain the point of order in a moment. When there is order in the house I will hear what the Leader has to say. The Leader of the Opposition. Mr HAMILTON-SMITH House of Assembly Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: In the last week of sitting, in a similar case, you ruled that a comment be withdrawn. In effect, what the minister has just said is an accusation of lying and I ask that he immediately withdraw and apologise. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I do not recall hearing anything the minister said which amounted to an accusation of lying. I will check the record and, if he has done so, I will direct him to withdraw it. The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The phrase I used in regard to comments this morning was 'a failure of honesty'. I cannot describe them any other way because the comments are not honest. However, let me say this: in regard to the other claims I have talked about, the opposition leader came into this place and claimed that a Labor source had helped him puzzle through forged documents. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: I take a point of order. This has nothing to do with the electrification of rail, and you know it, sir, and so does the speaker. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I think the Minister for Transport is now straying from the substance of the question. The Minister for Transport. The Hon. P.F. CONLON House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I simply make the point, Mr Speaker, that we are getting closer to an election, and you simply cannot—what words should I use? You cannot dissemble your way into government. The claims this morning made on the radio in response to an outstanding result for South Australia were a failure of honesty. There is going to be an election in March and we will pick up this fellow on every failure of honesty until then. But I will tell you this: I bet when he handed the documents to the police he did not name the source to the police. I bet he didn't do that. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The minister will resume his seat. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: That is irrelevant debate. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The deputy leader will resume her seat.