Question Time

SOUTHERN EXPRESSWAY

Mrs REDMOND (Heysen—Leader of the Opposition) (14:04): My question is to the Premier. Why was the public misled before the 2010 election when the government promised a Southern Expressway duplication for $370 million and a Darlington interchange for $75 million, and now the government is delivering the duplicated expressway without an interchange for $407 million—a $37 million blowout on the original cost?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I was going to question the wording of that question, but I presume that the Minister for Transport has a point of order on this.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:05): No. I have a point of order and I am also going to answer the question, but it was plainly—

The SPEAKER: Order! I can't hear the minister.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Madam Speaker, after 9½ years I am finally allowed to be nice. I want to be nice, but I will not yell over these people.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Madam Speaker, I am more—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Hammond, you are warned. Minister.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I am more than happy to talk about the promise in the election campaign, the costings on both sides, on the duplication of the Southern Expressway. Why it actually cost so much would be a relevant issue to talk about, too. First, let me say that in the election campaign we promised a duplication of the Southern Expressway at a price of—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Where is that fellow you ran against, Leon? We promised a duplication of the expressway for $370 million. Today, I announced the duplication—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, member for Unley!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I don't know why the member for Unley dislikes me so much, Madam Speaker.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: We actually have a great deal in common: we both brought down a leader of the opposition—the difference is that I was trying. I hope not to hear anything more.

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

An honourable member: Be nice now.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I will be if I am not interrupted. We promised an expressway at $370 million. The contract we have signed today allows that duplication, as promised, for $370 million. That is an inescapable, unavoidable conclusion; to say anything else is simply misleading. Added to that cost, as a result of consultation with—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —consultation, forced laugh. As a result of consultation with the community, and taking into account future growth, we actually added a lane to the scope of that project between—I think it is called Bedford Park and the end of it coming into the city. That allows not only for present capacity through to 2016 but also for increased capacity for decades to come. That is the stark difference about what we are prepared to do.

Firstly, on the comparison and costings, of course during the election campaign the Liberal opposition promised it and costed it at $280 million. We costed it at $370 million, and $370 million—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —has been shown to be absolutely correct; $280 million was shown to be absolutely wrong. What I can—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister is answering the question.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: In a very polite fashion and giving accurate information, which is our obligation.

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: The reason it cost $370 million is because, unlike what we have done in future-proofing this job for future growth, for a growth state, what the Liberals did then was spend the least amount of money they could to deliver it and, as a result, imposed a $200 million burden on the taxpayer of South Australia when it came to the duplication. These are also—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: When you are done, I will get back to the facts.

Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order, Madam Speaker. The minister is clearly debating the answer to the question.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: He is entering into speculation and using it to debate.

The SPEAKER: Thank you.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister is answering the question in the manner he chooses. You cannot question debate.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: He is speculating on what the Liberal Party was going to do. He is debating.

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister will return to the question.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I can tell you that the advice I have, as recently as today, from the chief executive of the department of transport, is that the increased cost of duplication was $200 million as a result of the then government's decision to reduce the scope. When they first went out on this project they went out with overpasses on the road that would have allowed future duplication; they then took them out to save costs. As a consequence, we have to rebuild all those. They added $200 million—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: If the minister, in answering his question, wants to have a debate about the results on this state of the State Bank disaster—

The SPEAKER: Order! Thank you, member for MacKillop.

Mr WILLIAMS: —which was brought about by that Labor government, we'll have the debate.

The SPEAKER: Thank you, member for MacKillop. Minister, have you finished your answer?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I point out that it is not a debate for me to report the advice of the head of the department. That advice is that $200 million—

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Norwood, you're warned.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: —that $200 million was added as a burden to the taxpayers of this state as a result of a failure to do this properly, and that is the difference.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: That is why—

Mr WILLIAMS: Madam Speaker, the pertinent point is that you lot cost the state $5 billion dollars.

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: That's the pertinent point.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Sit down and behave. Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I point out that the $37 million that we decided to add to the perfectly correct cost of $370 million was for a number of reasons. One was to pay for a $1 million road that the Liberals promised and never delivered. It will be delivered by this government. Two is to—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for MacKillop, do you want to take a walk? Pull your head in.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Two: we added to the project an extra lane in order to allow for future growth—exactly the opposite approach taken by the opposition when they cost the taxpayer $200 million extra unnecessarily.

Mr Marshall: What about the rest of the question?

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Norwood, you're very angry today. Behave yourself!

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I don't know what you had for lunch, but don't have it again.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!