GM HOLDEN

Mrs REDMOND (Heysen—Leader of the Opposition) (14:22): My question is again to the Premier. Will the Premier explain why his Minister for Manufacturing told the media on 22 March in relation to the Holden funding package, 'What we've guaranteed here is a workforce that will be building two new platforms with no forced redundancies'—a workforce of about 2,000—when the Premier has confirmed that Holden has 2,500 workers in South Australia, and is it the case that there could be about 500 fewer workers at Holden under this government funding deal?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Minister for State Development) (14:23): It seems that the opposition is desperate to talk down the future of Holden's in South Australia.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: The essence of the future security of Holden's is the billion dollar investment that will be made by a private company here in South Australia. I would have thought that the leveraging of $50 million for a billion dollar return, looks like, on any accounting—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Point of order.

Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order, Madam Speaker: the opposition is going to be asked to contribute to a debate this afternoon and we are trying to get some basic information. We have one minister saying that there is going to be 2,000 workers—

The Hon. J.W. Weatherill: Would you please sit down.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Thank you. What is your point of order?

Mr WILLIAMS: Standing order 98, relevance. There is no relevance to the question about the numbers of employees at Holden's and the answer that the Premier is giving.

The SPEAKER: Thank you. The member will sit down. I am sure the Premier will keep that point of order in mind.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and, obviously, if I could be permitted to complete my answer, the members will have the information they need. In respect of the question of no forced redundancy, it was raised in the course of negotiations. Holden did repeat their commitment of no forced redundancies at Elizabeth. That is their policy, but it is also true to say that it is not an explicit term of the agreement, and that is the point of difference that I clarified, and the minister has been open about that.

The truth is that where the security comes from is, in fact, the investment of over $1 billion, added to the $275 million in public funding. That is the nature of the security for the future. I repeat, as I have consistently maintained, that I have been given no advice of any plan to shed jobs. This agreement is about growing Holden's. Is also true—

Mr Marshall: How many jobs?

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —that we have been advised of minimum levels of production in volumes and, therefore, minimum employment levels; but I have steadfastly maintained that we are not going to put in the public sphere information which is commercially sensitive and which could damage Holden's competitive position. The fact that there is in the material that has been exchanged between the government and Holden's—

Mrs Redmond interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —information about worst-case scenario propositions, which are not the objective of Holden's, is not the same as what jobs are likely to be there in the future. The security for Holden's workers—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —the security that those opposite want to talk down, is the commitment of this government to invest in the future of Holden's.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Ramsay.