Address in Reply

ADDRESS IN REPLY

Debate on motion for adoption resumed.

Mr MARSHALL (Norwood) (12:12): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is with great pleasure that I rise to support this motion and sincerely thank His Excellency the Governor for his opening of the Second Session of the Fifty-Second Parliament of South Australia. I am a strong supporter of a non-political head of state, and I pay tribute to His Excellency the Governor, the Lieutenant- Governor, their families and their entire office in supporting both the legislative process in our parliament and, more broadly, the people of South Australia. I think they do an excellent job, and I am very pleased that he has been appointed for a further two-year term.

Historically, the Governor's speech to open a session of parliament outlines for the people of South Australia what the legislative agenda for the government will be for the coming session. This is a long-held tradition, but, of course, anybody who was there on the day, or anybody who has had an opportunity to read the Governor's speech, will see that there has been quite a marked break in tradition with regard to that speech. In fact, the Premier went on radio that morning to actually tell the people of South Australia that there would be surprises in this speech.

It begs the question: why didn't the Governor outline the legislative agenda for the government over the coming session? Well, I would put it to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that is because the government has a very, very flimsy legislative agenda for this coming session. In fact, this is something that has occurred since I was elected to parliament. In my first year in this place the government sat for only 31 days. Last year, and indeed this year, it is up to just over 50 days, but this to me demonstrates quite clearly that this government does not have a vision and does not have a legislative agenda. It is quite often abrogating its responsibilities to the federal government. I do not think that this is good for the people of South Australia, and I do not think that this is good for the parliament. So, what did the Governor talk about? He did not talk about the legislative agenda so what did he talk about in this speech which was, of course, prepared for him by the government?

He talked about the government's vision. It is probably logical to assume that, after a government has been in power for 10 years, it would not be a government which talks about what is going to happen in another 10 years; it could actually rely on some achievements and talk about how it is going to build on those achievements. Of course, it has been a very poorly performing government over 10 years and so the whole substance of the Governor's speech was really about what is going to happen in the future.

The Premier came into this place yesterday and not only said that this was a vision statement but that it was going to be very difficult to achieve a lot of the things which were outlined and some of these things were not going to be able to occur for another 10 years. The reader of this document is left wondering, 'What is this government going to do?' A very flimsy legislative agenda and a lot of things pushed way into the never-never.

Let us look at some of the detail of what was presented. One of the first things that was outlined by the Governor in his speech (one of the few references to new legislation) was that the government would introduce new legislation to replace the Aboriginal Heritage Act. This is something the government has been dealing with since 2009; this is certainly not a new announcement. You can go onto the website at any point in time and see not the current minister but the minister before, the Hon. Grace Portolesi, who was the previous minister for Aboriginal affairs and reconciliation.

As I said, one of the first things that this government outlined in its broad vision was really an announcement from 2009. This government has been revising the Aboriginal Heritage Act since 2009. This is not a new announcement: this is a very old announcement. It really points to the incompetence of the government when dealing with matters related to Indigenous affairs in this state. Not only has the government been revising the Aboriginal Heritage Act since 2009 but it has been revising the Aboriginal Lands Trust Act since 2009.

This is something that I have raised many times in the parliament. The government often puts it in its highlights list, when the minister presents the highlights of what they have achieved throughout the year. Last year, the former minister said that it was a highlight that they were continuing with the ongoing consultation for these acts. Under an FOI it was revealed that there had been no such attempt for over 18 months.

I have proven with the very first item mentioned in this vision that this is just a re-announcement, and a very poor one, that really highlights that this government has not been doing its work. The issues related to Indigenous affairs are complex. The opposition fully understands and appreciates that. The guts issue is that we want a government that does not say, 'This is hard so we are not going to do it.' We want to work with the government in these areas in a bipartisan way to advance the cause of Indigenous South Australians and to close the ever-widening gap which exists. I look forward to working with the new Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation (Hon. Paul Caica) on this matter.

The second great revelation that is contained in the Governor's speech is the revelation of manufacturing. It has taken a while for this government to understand the importance of the manufacturing sector. Do not forget that this is the government that closed down the South Australian Centre for Manufacturing, which was an incredibly important organisation and instrument of government. It was, of course, established by the former Liberal government. It was a world-class facility that helped our manufacturing sector in South Australia make a transition during that period of globalisation.

Well, the Labor government came to power, that is fine, 'We are going to close that down.' This is a Premier who I do not think has very strong credentials in the manufacturing sector. I myself came out of the manufacturing sector. As a previous member of the Manufacturing Industry Advisory Board under both Labor government and Liberal governments, I feel very strongly that this is a very important sector.

It is great that after 10 years in power we get a paragraph about the importance of the manufacturing sector in South Australia, but of course there is no detail. The government will point to the fact that they have renamed the department and included in its very longwinded title one word which says manufacturing. But changing a title does not change the government's attitude towards manufacturing. We need to see something far more significant.

When pressed on this issue, the Premier says, 'Well, we are going to start an advanced manufacturing council here in South Australia,' but of course there is no detail whatsoever and begs the question: what is going to happen with the Manufacturing Consultative Committee? Is that going to go? As always with this government, is it just changing the name of something, making a re-announcement but actually doing nothing to assist the underlying importance of this sector?

While I am talking about manufacturing, I would like to make a comment on the situation that exists at the moment in regard to Holden's because the Premier again on radio this morning wanted to go on and verbal the Liberal opposition, verbal me, and say that we need to work in a bipartisan way. I want to put on the record of this parliament that for more than a month we have been calling for a briefing from the government in regard to the situation at Holden's.

I want to make very clear that the Liberal opposition is 100 per cent committed to the manufacturing sector, 100 per cent committed to the automotive sector, and that we want to see a strong, vibrant and sustainable sector here in South Australia. I personally have a long association with Holden's; in fact, my father was an apprentice at Holden's and completed his trade there. I grew up in the Port, and I understand the importance of the automotive sector here in South Australia.

Let's make no mistake about this. We cannot just abrogate our responsibilities as the opposition to the government and say, 'Yes, write out a blank cheque, we will give you carte blanche with that.' I think it is completely reasonable that, on behalf of the taxpayers of South Australia, we asked that the Industry Development Committee, a subset of the Economic and Finance Committee, be formed to look at assisting this important sector in a bipartisan way.

Exactly what the Premier is calling for we would support, but it is just playing politics with the important role that Holden's plays in South Australia by coming out and saying we are not supporting it. Of course we are supporting it, but let us see the details. The Premier is asking taxpayers to put their funds in without knowing what they are going to get in return, and that just does not cut it.

I was very pleased to see, though, that the importance of the defence sector was highlighted. There is often argy-bargy between government and opposition in a lot of areas in the parliament, but the importance of the defence sector is 100 per cent agreed on by both sides of this parliament. I look forward to working with the Treasurer, who is also the Minister for Defence Industries in South Australia, to support this very important sector here in South Australia.

The defence sector has huge number of people directly employed in it and, whilst the Premier wants to talk about the importance of establishing—'establishing', he said—or creating an advanced manufacturing sector here in South Australia, I would invite the Premier perhaps to take a look at the defence sector because it has been operating in a very advanced manufacturing orientation for many decades in this state, and I hope that he gets out to have a look at it.

I just raise the issue, though, of ongoing funding for the Defence Teaming Centre, which was established in the mid-1990s and has enjoyed strong bipartisan support since its establishment. In fact, the Minister for Defence Industries has spoken in this parliament on many occasions—both the former defence industries minister, Hon. Kevin Foley, and the current defence industries minister, the Hon. Jack Snelling—on the importance of the Defence Teaming Centre in supporting our industries to obtain important work employing South Australians. So, it begs the question: why has this government not come out and said that there will be ongoing funding for the Defence Teaming Centre beyond 30 June this year?

We are getting very close to the end of this financial year and we still have no commitment whatsoever from the government in this important area. I call upon the government to make its intentions clear about ongoing support for the Defence Teaming Centre, both financial and otherwise, and continue to support this very important component of our defence industry in South Australia.

I will highlight very briefly an issue raised by the Governor about looking at improving liveable neighbourhoods. I was excited to read that the government will be looking at local solutions, such as better walking and cycling paths. This is something which is very dear to me, living in the great electorate of Norwood. Norwood is very close to the city and we would like to see improved cycling infrastructure to get commuter traffic into the city.

The proposal that I have been pushing, since being elected, is the concept of non-arterial road cycling routes. I think it is great that the government wants to grab a great big bucket of white paint and whack a line down Payneham Road, Magill Road, The Parade and Kensington Road, but in reality that is not an effective solution. Some very experienced commuter cyclists can use that but the vast majority of people do not want to be on the major arterial roads during key times when traffic is very heavy. In fact, motorists do not want to see cyclists on the major arterial roads, and there is an obvious natural friction between these two groups.

The obvious solution is to look at the feasibility of using the non-arterial roads, which run between the arterial roads, as a sort of bi-modal bicycle boulevard to get people, in a safe and pleasant environment, onto the roads cycling to school and work in the morning. I look forward to holding the government to its promise to create better walking and cycling paths and I hope that some of them can indeed come to Norwood.

Another major area the government highlighted in its broad vision was ways to reduce the burden of living costs on working families. This is, of course, something that you will get no argument on from the opposition. So, it was with much surprise, when I attended my very first Economic and Finance Committee meeting this morning, that the government rejected an inquiry into looking at the concessions which are paid to people in South Australia.

It highlights to me that this document is something that was put out for the press, the opening of parliament and the cameras: 'This is what we are going to do,' but on the very first occasion when the rubber hits the road, in the Economic and Finance Committee this morning, at about a quarter to 10, the government used its numbers to block any inquiry whatsoever into this matter. That shows this government to be the sham that it is.

I have gone through a couple of the disappointments that the government outlined. Let us now turn our attention to what the government did not talk about in its broad vision, because I think that is also very instructive. What is this government no longer highlighting as its key priorities? The first matter I want to raise, being the shadow minister for sustainability and climate change, is the complete omission of reference to sustainability and climate change in this new Premier's vision for South Australia.

We know for a fact that the previous premier was a strong supporter of the environment and a very strong advocate on behalf of climate change and the things that we in South Australia should be doing to make sure that we prepare ourselves for the best. There was not one single mention in the Governor's speech about what the new Premier will be doing. Let us take a little look at what decisions Premier Weatherill has made since coming to power. First, the whole department of sustainability and climate change is gone. It used to be something that sat within DPC, so it had the imprimatur of the premier. Now it is completely and utterly gone.

Secondly, the green energy grants program that was announced by the former premier was axed within weeks of the new Premier coming to power. The climate change and greenhouse gas emissions act was not only due to be put out for consultation but was to be revised by November last year, and this is a legislative requirement of this act. That has completely failed; we have not heard a whisper, we do not even know what department is going to be responsible for the updating. The garden products rebate, which drove efficiency in terms of water use in our home gardens—axed.

We also see that the government has really been dragging the chain on the Tonsley Park redevelopment. Members should not forget what this was heralded to be at the outset. Mitsubishi left that site in 2009, and the government stepped in and said it was going to spend $32 million of taxpayer funds to purchase the site, because it wanted to create a cluster, a green hub that was going to promote sustainable industries in South Australia. And you know what? The Liberal opposition supported that; we wanted to see that occur.

Fast forward to three years down the track; what do we have? I will tell you what we have: not much. The draft master plan that has been released is a shadow of its former self. The previous minister in this area, the Hon. Kevin Foley, said that he did not want this large parcel of important industrial land turned over to a bulky goods area with stores like Harvey Norman, Captain Snooze and others on this site; he wanted to see it as something that would be an engine room for South Australia to develop capability in sustainable industries.

Let us have a look at the master plan. About one-third of the site is actually turned over to residential housing; we are seeing high-density—up to four and five-storey—residential housing going onto about one-third of this site. What a disappointment. About a third of it is being turned over to commercial and retail outlets—again, this is a huge disappointment—and with the remaining third we have the TAFE redevelopment, of course. As members can see, there will be very little space down there to achieve the broad vision this government set, supported by the opposition, only a few years ago when it used taxpayer funds to purchase that $32 million Tonsley Park site.

The redevelopment down there has been a huge disappointment, and part of the reason for that disappointment is that we have three ministers all dealing with the one project. We have minister Kenyon, minister Conlon and minister Koutsantonis all working on this project. It is quite clear that the one who has the most say on this is minister Conlon, because most of the project is now being handled by the LMC. Minister Kenyon has dipped his oar in the water with his recent announcement regarding the TAFE down there, and we are yet to hear from minister Koutsantonis about whether he really does support sustainable industries in South Australia, whether he is actually going to do some work, get his department off its backside and do something about this important sector in South Australia.

While I am talking about minister Kenyon I would not mind highlighting the appalling state of South Australian exports, which also falls under his remit. In fact, the government's State Strategic Plan set a goal to achieve $25 billion worth of exports by the year 2013. I have consulted my calendar this morning and 2013 is next year, and the goal was to achieve $25 billion worth of exports. This was probably a reasonably achievable goal when it was actually set, but what has happened since then? This government has been in complete and utter disarray in terms of exports in South Australia. It was revealed earlier in the year, after information that we provided to the media, that a quarter of all of our overseas offices remain unmanned at the moment. It is complete and utter disarray.

When this government came to power, South Australia had approximately 7.5 to 7.6 per cent of the national exports. Today, we are heading down towards 4 per cent. So, we have fallen well behind. The minister's defence on this is that there is a high appreciating Australian dollar. Actually, it is the same high appreciating Australian dollar used throughout the entire country, so if we look at it on a percentage basis, as I said, it is down from 7.57 to about 4 per cent.

We are not going to have any chance of achieving this government's very own goal of $25 billion by 2013. The government moved it out to 2014. In the latest revision of the State Strategic Plan, the government moved it out to 2020. This is what the government does: if it cannot achieve the goals that it sets for itself, it just pushes out the completion date. It is not good enough.

Our export industries in South Australia need to be supported. They have been very poorly supported by this government. We have the highest taxation regime in Australia. The government has removed support for CITCSA. It does not have a plan in terms of exports, and our overseas offices are in complete and utter disarray. Again, this was an element which was not even discussed in this vision for South Australia.

Another area the Premier also failed to deal with is small business. I thought it would be almost obvious that anybody who has had anything to do with South Australia over an extended period of time would actually understand the importance of the small business sector in South Australia. I thought it would be incumbent upon our Premier to understand that we have 135,000 small businesses in South Australia providing the vast majority of private sector employment in South Australia. I thought it would be obvious that the Premier would understand the importance of this sector and support it, but when we read the Governor's speech and when we actually look at the Premier's agenda for this next session, there is not one mention.

Let us just have a bit of a look at what this government has done to support the small business sector since it came to power. As I previously mentioned, this was the government which closed the South Australian Centre for Manufacturing. It also closed the Small Business Centre, which was later called the Business Centre, which again was a fantastic instrument of government looking to support and nurture not only businesses through transition but also the start-ups which exist in South Australia each year. It has closed down Small Business Week. It has removed all funding for BECs, an important part of the ongoing support that this government had for the Small Business Centre—gone.

The government has announced that it is going to remove all funding from Innovate SA. In fact, part way through the cycle, it removed funding for key programs supporting the small business sector in terms of investing in infrastructure. It has closed down Playford Capital. Really, it is very difficult to see what the government has done for the small business sector. Of course, it has given us the Australian title in terms of how expensive it is to operate here. Numerous agencies have confirmed that, for three years in a row, we are the most expensive place to do business in Australia.

The government has also put a whole pile of other obstacles and barriers in the way of small business, and the most important among these at the moment is the issue of the government and the payment of its bills. This government has been absolutely hopeless at paying its bills. It is getting slower and slower and slower. I can only assume that this is deliberate, because, as a taxpayer and as a member of parliament, I know that this is a government that has put a lot of money into Shared Services over a long period of time to improve our interface and our ability to actually pay our bills on time.

I can only assume that the fact that our bills are not being paid promptly and that the lag beyond normal trading times is getting greater and greater is a deliberate attempt by this government to actually use the funds of the business community to offset its own parlous debt problems. Make no mistake about this: this is a problem for business because, if you are holding up payment, you are increasing the overdraft costs for businesses in South Australia and also tying up capital which small businesses need to run and develop their businesses.

The two new public holidays announced by this government are a disaster for small business. I was down in Mount Gambier only last week and speaking to restaurateurs, hotels, aged-care facilities and people who operate petroleum stations and they all said the same thing: 'Why are we going to have an increase in our costs so that the government can get through its deregulation of shop trading hours in Adelaide? That's got nothing to do with us. That's going to put up our costs.' It is completely unacceptable.

I also had meetings with many people in the South-East who are very concerned about the implications of the Work Health and Safety Bill. This bill will cause huge increases in costs for the small business sector and they are yet to be convinced about any merits of this legislation whatsoever. I am sure we will be hearing more and more about this difficult legislation.

So, make no mistake, this is a government which is no friend of the sustainability sector in South Australia, it is no friend of exporters and it is no friend of the small business sector. This is a government which, after 10 years, really has no vision for South Australia. As I have been able to outline to the house today, there is virtually nothing new in here. There are a lot of re-announcements and a lot of spin and a lot of stuff that might look good for the television cameras and journalists but, in reality, what we want in South Australia, unequivocally, is a government which has a legislative agenda, which sits its full complement of days each year and gets on, in a quiet, prudent and efficient way, with running our state and moving us forward.

Mr SIBBONS (Mitchell) (12:42): I also begin by thanking His Excellency the Governor for his address on Tuesday and congratulate His Excellency on the extension to his appointment.

I rise today to speak about the future of our great state, to look back and reflect on where we were 10 years ago and where we are headed in the decade to come, and to look at the challenges that we face and the decisions that will need to be made to ensure the security and prosperity of all South Australians for the future.

George Bernard Shaw once said, 'We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.' I don't know much about the literary greats, but I think he was onto something there. We can learn a lot by taking a moment to reflect on the past. A considered approach to history can aid us in knowing what pitfalls to avoid and which successes we can build upon. So, what does the last decade have to teach us? If we choose to learn from history, what did South Australia look like prior to Labor winning government in 2002? Here are a few fast facts that may help you paint the picture.

In June 2000, ABS figures showed that unemployment was at 8.2 per cent and had been increasing since 1998. In 2000-01 alone, South Australia lost 11,000 jobs. There was no real investment in public health, with no new hospital beds, no cuts to waiting lists and no relief for emergency departments. In real terms, there were cuts to public education spending and a cut of 13 per cent in 2001 to vocational education, despite warnings from the Reserve Bank of skills shortages in the pipeline.

We had a decaying transport network, with a lack of investment in road, rail and port infrastructure. There was a lack of investment in water security and water infrastructure. There was a major sell-off of public assets to the value of $7.45 billion, including ETSA, the public bus service, SAGASCO, Adelaide Airport and the Torrens Island power station. The net debt, as of 30 June 2000, was estimated at $4.2 billion. We had the Liberals' crowning achievement of providing the good people of the south of Adelaide with the world's longest reversible one-way freeway.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr SIBBONS: Let us look forward to 2012 and see where we are today with Labor at the helm. South Australia's employment growth in 2011 was 0.7 per cent or 5,400 additional jobs. Since 2002, employment in South Australia has grown by 128,700. The unemployment rate is 5.4 per cent, despite a very fragile global economy.

There has been an increase in health funding every single year under Labor, with the health budget now 120 per cent higher than it was a decade ago. We have 200 more hospital beds than a decade ago, with 250 more on the way, and reduced waiting times in emergency rooms and for elective surgery.

South Australia has the highest gross state product growth rate in the country in per capita terms, with a 1.5 per cent increase versus a national average of 0.6 per cent. This is 32.4 per cent higher than in 2000. In 2011, the value of South Australian overseas goods exports rose by 29 per cent—the highest growth rate in Australia, at a record high of $12 billion. Business investment was 41.4 per cent higher in 2011 than in 2000. Private new capital expenditure is at a high level in South Australia, growing by a solid 17 per cent in the year to March 2011. Business investment reached $10.3 billion in the year to March 2011—a near record high.

Massive investments by Labor in critical infrastructure and transport projects are continuing to provide a boost to the construction sector through investments such as the new RAH, the Adelaide Oval redevelopment, the electrification of the rail network and the South Road superway project. There are currently $109 billion worth of major developments underway or in the pipeline in South Australia. Net debt for the 2011-12 financial year is estimated at $4.4 billion and the beginning of construction to duplicate the Southern Expressway will end a decade of embarrassment at having the world's longest reversible one-way freeway.

I do not claim to be an economist, but it seems to me that a decade ago, even after flogging off as many assets as they could, the Liberal government was still carrying around the same level of debt as we are now and they did diddly-squat to show for it. They had diddly-squat. There was no investment in jobs, no investment in health, no investment in infrastructure. Unemployment was up, private investment was down, government investment was virtually non-existent and the cost of living was on the increase.

I am not saying that things are totally rosy in the garden right now. We also have debt, cost of living pressures are real and they are increasing—there is no question of that. However, the debt we are carrying is based on the massive investment this Labor government has delivered to secure jobs and employment, now and for the future—investment in infrastructure, public health and education and securing our essential services for the future.

Crime has also fallen over the past nine years by around 35 per cent. ABS figures released in 2011 show that there were fewer homicides, sexual assaults, robberies, unlawful entries and motor vehicle and other thefts in South Australia compared with previous years. Since Labor was elected in 2002, 17 new police stations have been opened across metropolitan and regional South Australia. Just this year, a $53.4 million new police academy and the $3.5 million Yalata police station have been officially opened.

Yet while Labor has made a serious effort towards tackling all kinds of illegal activity, from graffiti to organised crime, often those opposite have preferred to sit on their hands. Part of this government's mandate when coming into office in March 2010 was a commitment to continue to fight against outlaw bikie gangs and organised crime, and we stand by this. We are committed to working with police, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the commonwealth to ensure that the right tools are available to curtail these gangs and their criminal activities.

Before returning to office in 2010, the government already had a strong record of pursuing organised criminal gangs in South Australia and leading the other states to develop similar anti-association legislation. The Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act 2008 demonstrated our commitment to dismantling and destroying crime gangs and removing this scourge from our community.

Unfortunately, in 2010 the High Court in the case of Totani did not support this government's effort to break organised crime in our state, but we have not given up on our attack. A decision of the High Court will not stop this government from working to protect the community from the insidious crime and violence perpetrated by these barbarians with no regard for the public.

While the work of this government to break outlaw crime gangs is ongoing, we are beginning to deliver. As the Premier stated the other day, the Attorney-General has introduced new bills to this parliament to address serious and organised crime. Not only is this government working to repair the 2008 act to address the concerns of the High Court, it is also introducing new measures to attack the criminal behaviour of these organisations and the individuals who create them.

The community expects that its elected representatives deliver safe streets, neighbourhoods and communities for them and their families, and this government is working to meet that expectation. The only action those opposite have taken is to try to block and obstruct the passage of laws which will make our communities safer.

If there is one thing I have learned in the short time I have been an MP in this place, it is this: it is politically easy to do nothing and go nowhere. It is much harder to have vision, much more difficult to act on that vision and to get things moving, get things done. It is much harder to spend money on prevention, much harder securing our state's water, energy and housing supplies for the future. It is about preparation and planning a long-term approach to government.

That is what I see as the fundamental difference in the attitudes of the Liberal and Labor parties to governing this great state. Liberals prefer to take the easy road: a do nothing, spend nothing attitude to governing, with no vision, no policy and no plan. This is not a harmless approach. It is damaging to our state's economy and to the social fabric in the long term. Unemployment, decaying public infrastructure and miserly public health and education budgets lead to an increase in generational poverty and a growing gap between those who have and those who have not. If we learn from history, we learn that this is the price we pay for a do nothing government.

On the other side, there is the Labor alternative: investment, renewal and a visionary approach, taking into account world's best practice. Our Thinker in Residence program is an example of the way in which a small investment in international experience and success can produce real and lasting results, from a reduction in the number of people sleeping rough on our streets to a world-class level of recycling and investment in renewable energy. We continue to punch well above our weight, both nationally and internationally. Such things require a serious commitment to government. Such projects can be complex to explain and they often result in calls for more to be done elsewhere. They can be difficult to deliver and the tangible results will sometimes be a long time coming.

But, while it is not an easy road to travel, results are achieved, progress is made. Achieving these things is not easy. They do not happen by accident but by design. They are the result of responsible and timely decision-making, of investment and direct action over the past decade by the state Labor government. Personally, I do not think you can put a price on the excellent delivery of essential public services in health and education. Our elderly and our children deserve that.

South Australians deserve a state-of-the-art brand-new public hospital. South Australians deserve world-class public education facilities, with the latest technology so that all kids can access a great education. South Australians deserve investment in their public transport network with new buses, trains and trams. They deserve better roads and they deserve a Southern Expressway that enables us to drive in more than one direction. Let us look now and see what the future holds.

What will the next decade hold for South Australians? Where will our economy, our health and education system, our housing sector and our precious natural resources be in 2022? So much depends on the direction and approach taken by the state government. There are some enormous challenges ahead of us. The impact of the global financial crisis is still being felt around the world. Australians have been cushioned from the full force of its impact, thanks largely to the quick and effective stimulus package put in place by the Labor government at the federal level.

However, we are not immune and there are further potential shocks on the economic horizon. The sovereign debt issues facing Greece and the EU are the most obvious but by no means the only challenge for global financial markets. In some countries it is possible that a high level of unemployment, combined with a lack of consumer confidence, may result in a resurgence of protectionist measures by governments and a decline in overseas investment by the private sector. That is, when things go bad people withdraw and protect their own backyards first.

In such circumstances it is vitally important that we have a government that is prepared to protect local jobs. We will not stand idly by and watch while investors move offshore and workers are dumped on the scrapheap. We must make sure South Australia continues to be a state that encourages businesses, large and small, to invest and to operate here. We must make sure our economy is diverse enough so that we are not dependent on just one sector for our economic security. Agriculture, mining, tourism, food and wine production, manufacturing, tertiary education, defence, and science and technology are all areas in which we have the expertise. They all areas in which, with appropriate government support, we can actually create jobs, wealth and economic security for this great state.

Industry assistance should not be synonymous with government handouts. Co-investment, with industry matching public investment dollar for dollar, grants for research and development, and skills and training packages are all examples of modern industry assistance that is offered by governments all over the globe. This is an area close to my heart, and the recent debate over the industry assistance package for Holden's showed only too clearly that the Liberals are missing in action when it comes to standing up for local jobs. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

[Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00]