Grievance Debate

ADELAIDE OVAL

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:52): I rise today with a very heavy heart. This is one of the darkest days for the people in the South-East who I represent, because those people, I am sure, today, when they hear the news that has emanated from the Treasurer, will feel betrayed and gutted.

Last evening I attended the vote at the Goyder Pavilion, Wayville. I indicated in the house recently that I was voting no to the SACA proposal. One of the reasons I chose to exercise my vote in that way, notwithstanding being a proud member of SACA and wanting to see all sorts of improvements to the cricket ground, was because I am also a representative of the taxpayers and, more particularly, the taxpayers of the South-East.

There is no way that I could have voted yes when I knew, and those of us on this side knew, that the proposal to spend almost $1 billion on the Adelaide Oval upgrade and the precincts surrounding the Adelaide Oval would be paid for by the sale of our forestry assets. I knew, and the people on this side of the house knew, that regional South Australia is expendable to this government. There is not one caring bone in this government for what happens outside of metropolitan Adelaide, not one caring bone.

Ms Fox interjecting:

Mr Williams: Oh, oh!

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: Madam Speaker, the Treasurer today broke a number of promises and made some outrageous statements about claims that people were saying that 3,000 jobs would disappear overnight. He did not have the courage to say where he heard that because he never heard it. He made it up. He is playing base politics with the livelihoods of the people in the South-East. The very report that he used to underpin his decision actually said something very different to what he would have us believe. It does say that if there is any amount of logs exported out of the South-East, it will have a dramatic impact on jobs in the South-East, and that is the very fear of the people that I and the member for Mount Gambier represent. That is the very fear that those people have in their hearts and in their minds.

The report bases this assumption that there will not be job losses in the South-East on saying that there will not be an export of logs. It bases that on the assumption that the domestic price for log is, in fact, higher than the export price, and it comes to that conclusion by comparing the domestic price of log in South Australia with the export price of log out of New Zealand. It is very clear. It is all spelt out on pages 55 and 56 of the report, and I invite members to read it. There is a footnote at the bottom of page 56, and I will read that to the house:

In addition, New Zealand sawlogs are typically grown under different conditions with different silvicultural practices. One result is that the timber is less dense and thus less useful for structural purposes. We understand that, as a rule, New Zealand timber is not suitable for producing machine grade pine MGP10; rather, it would typically be graded as MGP8, if such a grade existed in Australia.

The footnote puts the lie to the whole premise on which the minister bases his claim that there will be no jobs in the South-East. The sawlog that is exported out of New Zealand is apples, whereas the sawlog produced in the South-East of South Australia is oranges.

Football, cricket, the Crows, Port Adelaide and SACA are all big winners, and good on them. Who would not say yes if somebody knocked on their door and offered to buy their house, rebuild it and lease it back to them for 50 years for no rent. That is what they have done. They are the big winners. However, today, the big losers are the truth and the people of the South-East of this state.