INTERSTATE RAIL TERMINAL

Mr PICCOLO (Light) (14:59): Is the Minister for Transport aware of a range of views in relation to moving the interstate rail terminal to Adelaide and can he explain some of those views?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (15:00): I can, because with this latest proposal of the opposition to move interstate rail—of course, it may be the last remaining piece of its west park vision as its stadium sinks into the Parklands—we finally know who they are building the stadium for, because apparently the cricket and footy is going to Adelaide Oval. They are building it for dead baseballers. What you can do at Adelaide Oval is watch the footy and the cricket; if you go to their stadium you can watch 'Shoeless Joe' Jackson—of course, only if you're a believer.

The Hon. K.O. Foley: Build it and they will come.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: No talking to the football, no talking to the cricket; if you build it they will come. Well, I am afraid they are not going to come. Maybe they are going to start their own football team. Get Malcolm Turnbull to coach it, then Port would win some games. The last remaining part of their harebrained scheme, of course, is the transfer of interstate rail to Keswick. This idea has been around for some time. In fact, Di Laidlaw first started pursuing this in 1998, and this is what she said in estimates:

I am very keen—and I believe that most South Australians would back me in this—to seek to have the interstate passenger trains come back to Adelaide Railway Station.

She did something, though, that the Leader of the Opposition should have paid attention to. She said:

I have to acknowledge that I feel quite emotionally involved in the concept of bringing the trains back, but a decision will not be made on emotion alone. It will be based on cost benefit and an investment return.

That was, as I said, in July 1998. She did then have those investigations. She did what a prudent person would do—not a reckless person, a prudent person. So, by December 1999 what were her views, because she did do the report 10 years ago? Apparently the trains have got shorter or something in the last decade. Here is what she said after doing those investigations, after actually getting the experts to have a look at it twice. And she was very keen; she was emotionally attached. This is what she said about the proposal in December 1999, 'Absolutely unrealistic.' Her reasons:

The extension of the Adelaide Convention Centre would place such a terminal so far from King William Street that it would create not solve connection problems. The North Terrace train station platforms can't cater for one kilometre long, 27 carriage interstate trains.

I do apologise, because yesterday I said that the trains were 800 metres. I am now advised that they are not one kilometre: they are up to 1.1 kilometres. I can also point out that they do not add freight to the Darwin line, not that it makes any difference. They are 1.1 kilometres long. Now, what else did she say? She said:

Any redevelopment of the platforms would require digging into hectares of the northern Parklands...

and lastly—

...the long trains when arriving or departing in peak hour would create commuter chaos.

It sounds familiar. It is what we told you yesterday. It is what everyone who has ever looked at it tells you. It is utterly impossible. It is simply another example of the utter recklessness of the Leader of the Opposition and her team. She was on the radio just three days ago asking people why we source our trams from overseas. She told them that they build trams at Islington and take them to Melbourne. I do not know why she would make that up, unless she is incredibly badly informed.

I can say that the last trams built in South Australia were in 1952. In the immortal words of Maxwell Smart, 'Missed by this much.' The last trams made in Melbourne were in the 1980s. How can the Leader of the Opposition go on the radio and tell people things that are not true unless it is, of course, that she does not care and does not know? How can she tell people what is good for football and cricket when she has never spoken to them—never been to the football?

Can I just advise the Leader of the Opposition about her concerns about winter parking. Not only do they do it at Football Park, but I am reliably advised that they do it at the MCG with a slightly higher winter rainfall than Adelaide has.

What is absolutely clear is that this is the greatest cargo cult, pig in a poke hoax on the people of South Australia. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to take me in her chauffeur-driven car up to Islington and show me these trams they are building. This is a tremendous illustration of the utter lack of respect for any quality of work.

I repeat: Di Laidlaw, emotionally attached to it, looked at it and then told people that it was utterly unrealistic. What I urge the Leader of the Opposition to do is actually to look at it unemotionally and honestly and then tell us whether it is realistic; if she thinks it is realistic, show us the plans—just show us the plans.