Question Time

GOVERNMENT STATIONERY CONTRACT

Mr MARSHALL (Norwood—Leader of the Opposition) (14:10): My question is to the Premier. Why has Labor bypassed our state's 380 newsagents and their staff—

The SPEAKER: A point of order from me: wouldn't it be better to address it to the government? The Premier is here not as a representative of a registered political party: he is here as a member of the government.

Mr MARSHALL: I'll rephrase my question, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Why has the government bypassed our state's 380 newsagents and their staff for the whole-of-government stationery purchase contracts which have been awarded to multinational companies?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The Minister for Finance. Before he begins, I call the member for Morialta to order, and I call the member for MacKillop to order. Minister for Finance.

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN (Napier—Minister for Finance, Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (14:11): Thank you Mr Speaker. On 29 November, I made a ministerial statement to the house which detailed the process by which the tender process was run for the across government stationery contract. I have not received one comment from the opposition challenging the administration of this process nor the probity by which the final decision was arrived at.

I believe there is general agreement that the assessment made by the probity auditor, PSI Australia Pacific Pty Ltd, of the tender documentation, approval documents, the evaluation process, management of tender documents and final purchase recommendation, is unchallengeable. Similarly, I have not received any criticism from the opposition of the use of government of the tender process as the chief mechanism by which government can achieve best value for money in the procurement of goods and services. I take it as a given that the opposition stands firmly behind the tender process—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN: Oh, you don't? So, that's where we go if you get government—you will abandon the tender process.

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: Point of order, Mr Speaker: yesterday you ruled that the government wasn't responsible for the opposition's position. I just draw your attention to the minister's answer.

The SPEAKER: Yes, I will listen carefully to what the minister has to say. Minister, would you be seated, but in that pause, provided by the very pertinent point of order from the member for Davenport, I would like to call the members for Kavel, Heysen and the leader to order, warn the member for Morialta for the first time and the member for Chaffey for the first time. Thank you, minister.

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN: I think it is a given that the tender process constitutes best business practice. On the matter of awarding contracts to interstate companies, other than a comment made by the then opposition leader, the member for Heysen, that the state government should positively discriminate in favour of local firms, the opposition has also been mute. This is probably due to the fact that it was pointed out to the opposition—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Minister, you are responsible to the house for the tender but not for the attitude of the opposition to the tender, so could you segue back to the substance of the question?

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN: Yes, I'll segue back. So, in the awarding of the contract to two Victorian companies, we were bound by the Howard era Australia New Zealand Government Procurement Agreement, which obliges all governments in Australia and New Zealand to treat Australia and New Zealand as if they constitute one market and prevents government from discriminating in favour of one state over another. In a practical sense, if we were to adopt the proposition that we would not deal with Victorian-based companies we could, in the absence of this particular agreement, find that the Victorian government took a similar approach and denied South Australian-based companies the opportunity to bid for government business in a larger business environment.

In terms of the process, Business SA made the comment that there could be greater assistance given to South Australian companies in preparing their tender documents. On this point, I have had discussions with Business SA and the government made the decision to appoint an industry participation advocate.

All forms of assistance to South Australian businesses that are engineered by the industry participation advocate will have to comply with the Australia New Zealand Government Procurement Agreement. They will also have to comply with the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement, which specifically allows Australian companies to tender for US government business and vice versa, and any other trade agreements that may be relevant to the South Australian government tender process.

The SPEAKER: There is a point of order from the member for Davenport. If the point of order is time—

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: The clock does show 55 minutes—

The SPEAKER: Yes, I know what the clock shows, but the timekeeper here, in the absence of my Red Army stopwatch, is the Clerk, and the Clerk judges time on. There were points of order and general rowdiness and the clock shows that the minister has 40 seconds. The minister.

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN: Finally—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. M.F. O'BRIEN: Yes, you don't like the answer, do you? Finally, in relation to this particular contract, it is legally binding and enforceable by the courts, and any moves to dishonour this particular contract would bring great uncertainty to not only the South Australian business community but the business community around Australia as to the integrity of the tender process in this state and our commercial reputation.

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: Supplementary, Mr Speaker.

The SPEAKER: Before I consider your supplementary, I warn the member for Heysen for the first time.