House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Health, Oracle Corporate System HEALTH, ORACLE CORPORATE SYSTEM Mr HAMILTON-SMITH House of Assembly Waite HEALTH, ORACLE CORPORATE SYSTEM Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite) (16:03): My question is again to the Minister for Health. Has he misinformed cabinet, and has he failed to correct that misinformation, about the Oracle IT system he introduced across his department? The Auditor-General's Report tabled today explains that the minister failed to bring a business case to cabinet when he first introduced the project to cabinet, misinformed cabinet about the cost of the project, and he advises today that, as of the date of publishing of the report, the minister has still not corrected that misinformation to cabinet. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I will allow the minister to answer that question, but it was a very provocative question. I think you need to defend yourself. The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health and Ageing Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Minister for the Arts The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health and Ageing, Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse, Minister for the Arts) (16:04): Thank you, Madam Speaker. The member for Waite has tried about four times to make a political point in relation to this issue; I have addressed it several times, and I will do it again. I am advised the actual cost of the Oracle contract is $9.6 million for five years only. Whole-of-life costs, outside of the contract, are offsetting in nature and have no impact on operations or the state's budgetary commitments beyond the forward estimates period. Whilst the purchase recommendations submitted to the State Procurement Board sought approval for a 15-year term, Oracle Corporation— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! Listen to the minister's answer. The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: —policy prohibits it from contracting for periods greater than five years in duration. The approval cabinet submission, therefore, reflects the final negotiated position with Oracle Corporation and costs that could be estimated with certainty. The recurrent costs for five years are set out in the cabinet submission which has been reviewed and endorsed by the Department of Treasury and Finance in their cabinet costing comment. As part of the development of the phase two rollout, which will include the related Benefits Realisation Plan for Oracle, SA Health will provide cabinet with a formal update on the current status of the project and proposed completion of phase 2. It was done entirely properly. The member has tried this four or five times. The answer remains the same: cabinet was properly informed. It was on the basis of the rules that— An honourable member interjecting: The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: Well, the Auditor-General, I am quite sure, is happy to hear me say this here and will read what I have to say. Cabinet was properly informed. Treasury and Finance signed off on it. This arrangement was absolutely put in place according to the standards of cabinet.