ADELAIDE OVAL

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (14:37): My question is to the Treasurer. Has the government now converted the $30 million SACA guarantee to a $30 million loan that has already been paid to SACA; and are the interest payments to government being taken out of the $535 million budget for the Adelaide Oval project or are they being paid separately by SACA?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (14:37): It is interesting that the opposition has turned on the oval yet again.

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

The SPEAKER: Order! The deputy leader will be quiet.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The details of the funding for the oval have been made very clear and there has been a staged process where the participants do what they do and we do what we do.

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! I warn the member for Norwood.

The Hon. I.F. Evans interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! I warn the member for Davenport. The member for Davenport and the member for Norwood, you are both warned. You will get one more warning. Minister.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I am struggling with the question of the member.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: One tries so hard to be courteous and I sometimes feel that I am a victim of my own good nature. The question of the member for Davenport was: did the $30 million turn into a loan and are we paying the interest payments out of the $535 million? For the explanation for the member for Davenport, they did not lend us $30 million, so we do not have to pay interest payments. They borrowed the $30 million and they—

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The minister has obviously misheard the question because the question clearly says 'and are the interest payments to government being taken out of the $535 million budget for the Adelaide Oval project or being paid separately by SACA'?

Mr Williams: It's very clear.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: 'Very clear.' There was a period where there was an extension and I will bring the details back.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: There was a period where we extended the date for the conversion to a loan. There was an interest payment in that period. It is a small amount and how it is dealt with, I will come back to the house on.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: That doesn't—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I'm actually just trying to be courteous to you people.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the member for Finniss! I warn the member for Finniss.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: There was a delay, I think from memory, of one month from the conversion of that into a loan and there was an interest payment and the treatment of that will be dealt with. I don't believe it will come out from that sum of money. It is a modest sum of money in the overall picture—I think from memory, some $90,000.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Madam Speaker, I really would like to simply talk about this in a sensible fashion.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The truth is this—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! You will listen to the minister. He is being very calm about this.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: There is $450 million plus 85 available—$535 million. That is the full extent of the taxpayers' contribution on this project. This project, with that contribution, has now been welcomed by football, by cricket, by football interstate—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I have just said that there was one small amount to cover that interest payment and we will deal with it. Madam Speaker, I would love to answer the question if these people would stop interjecting. The truth is that the entire obligation of the taxpayer is the $535 million. That has not changed. There is a campaign by the opposition to find some new—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! This should be a very simple question to ask, and answer, and it is taking up half of question time.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Madam Speaker, can I point out that the opposition is guaranteed 10 questions per question time.

Mr PENGILLY: I rise on a point of order, Madam Speaker. I refer to standing order 128—relevance: what's the number of questions got to do with the answer to a question that he has been told twice and still can't answer?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I will try to explain again. There is no ongoing obligation to cover interest payments because there aren't any to cover. There was one. I have explained that. I don't know what it is. I will bring the actual number back to the house. I don't think it will need to come out of the $535 million because the $535 million itself is a very large sum of money that may well be earning interest at some point somewhere. When we are talking about $90,000 against $535 million, you really are pursuing the rats and mice.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The point I make is this: the opposition has made claim after claim about this project that are completely untrue. They have tried to promote fear about this project; they have tried to promote the proposition that the taxpayer is exposed for more than $535 million, and it is simply not true. What I would say is that—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —we are working extremely hard to deliver—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Unley will be quiet.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: We are working extremely hard to deliver a project that will give a world-class stadium to the precinct and, at the same time, deliver some $700 million worth of other investment to the Riverbank precinct. What we are talking about is an investment north of $1.1 billion, in a riverbank precinct that runs some 500 metres on the river. Can I say to the opposition, if they think that some—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, deputy leader!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —$90,000, or whatever it was (and I will bring that information back to the house) out of $1.1 billion is a significant amount of money in this—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Madam Speaker, this is nearly impossible.

The SPEAKER: Yes, it is. It is getting ridiculous. Can you get your answer to a conclusion, and they will be quiet.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: What I was trying to point out, before the member for Finniss took his point of order, was that if they are going to behave like this, I am not going to guarantee them 10 questions anymore because this is ridiculous behaviour. It is absolutely ridiculous behaviour.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The simple truth is this: there was a delay in the conversion of that money into a loan, and there was one interest payment that I understand had to be covered. All I can say is that, if you are really worried about that amount of money out of a $1.1 billion project on the precinct, it simply proves what rats and mice people they really are.

Can I say this: please, for God's sake, bring back Martin Hamilton-Smith. For, while I did not agree with everything he said, he had a vision for this precinct, and I applaud him for it.

The SPEAKER: Point of order.

Mr PENGILLY: Once again, 128: relevance.

The SPEAKER: Relevance: I uphold that point of order. Have you finished your answer, minister?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, I didn't ask you!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I simply make the point that it is peculiar for an opposition to take a point of order every few minutes on an answer when they behave in such a disorderly—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —fashion themselves. I am quite happy to invite the member for Davenport into my office this afternoon, and we will—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: A very nice office. A little bigger than his, but that's the way it goes in this business—3½ more years, Iain. I am quite happy to go through that in detail with the officers from SAFA—they do not work for me, they work for the Treasurer—and be completely transparent.

I will say this in the most statesmanlike fashion I can: I invite the member for Davenport in to my office, with the representatives of SAFA, to go through all of the details of what that loan treatment is. For me, I have to tell you, Madam Speaker, it has not been a big issue in my mind. It is a $1.1 billion investment in 500 metres, and I think—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —the opposition would be well paid—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —to get on board this, because I do know that the former Liberal premier has been to see the opposition on this and suggested they need to change tack on it.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! We will give the member for Light the courtesy of listening to his question. Treasurer, be quiet.