House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Budget Forecast BUDGET FORECAST Mr MARSHALL House of Assembly Norwood Leader of the Opposition BUDGET FORECAST Mr MARSHALL (Norwood—Leader of the Opposition) (14:21): My question is again to the Premier. Why should the public believe tomorrow's budget forecast, given that the government has promised seven surpluses in seven years, but six of these surpluses have now turned out to be deficits? The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly Cheltenham Premier Minister for State Development Minister for the Public Sector Minister for the Arts BUDGET FORECAST The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Treasurer, Minister for State Development, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for the Arts) (14:19): Let's once again intrude some facts on the analysis. In the last four years of Liberal government 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 we had all deficits, then in 2002 there was a surplus, 2003 surplus, 2004 surplus— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: A point of order from the member for Unley. Mr PISONI House of Assembly Mr PISONI: He is doing it again. I believe that the Premier is entering debate. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: No, that was not a legitimate point of order and, accordingly I warn the member for Unley for the first time. The question was about promising seven surpluses, six of which turned out to be deficits. The Premier is addressing exactly that point, talking about the 2002 and 2003 budget results. Treasurer. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I saw the rather desperate media release that trawled through past matters and I think it is appropriate that some factual material be put on the record. Let me go back. In 2002-03—which was the year after, I think, treasurer Lucas delivered his last deficit—there was a surplus of $448 million, in 2003-04 there was a surplus of $385 million, in 2004-05 there was a surplus of $224 million—and if I recall, back in those days many of those surpluses were actually in excess of what was forecast. In 2005-06 there was a surplus of $202 million, in 2006-07 there was a $209 million surplus, in 2007-08 there was a $464 million surplus, and then in 2008-09, which, of course, began to coincide with the global financial crisis, there was a deficit of $233 million. In 2009-10 there was a surplus again, as it happens, of $187 million, which— The Hon. I.F. Evans House of Assembly The Hon. I.F. Evans: That was Julia. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I do concede that was largely due to our commonwealth stimulus. The Hon. I.F. Evans House of Assembly The Hon. I.F. Evans: Nine billion dollars from the commonwealth. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Exactly; that's a completely legitimate point, but it was in the context of the deepest depression the world has seen since the Great Depression. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: The world! The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Yes, the world; that's what the Great Depression was. Then we had— An honourable member House of Assembly An honourable member: They didn't see it at Burnside. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: That's right; it wasn't observable from Burnside. In 2010-11 there was a small deficit of $53 million, in 2011-12 $284 million, and the rest will be revealed tomorrow. Can I say that we rely upon the same forecast that those opposite rely upon; the Treasury office prepares the budget estimates, but it was simply not foreseeable. The global financial crisis was not foreseeable. Fortunately for South Australia, we had already begun to make plans to embark upon the largest infrastructure spend that we have seen in many decades, because there had been an under-investment in infrastructure in this state. During the life of the previous government we were seeing infrastructure expenditure that was not even matching depreciation, so we began to reinvest in our capital projects, and the choices that we have made, when the global crisis has hit and it's washed over our finances, is not to retreat from those investments, because it is crucial to maintain momentum in the economy. I know those opposite call that a false economy, but just have a look at what would happen. The economy would have plummeted if we had withdrawn in the manner in which those opposite propose. Of course there are deficits that arise out of the effects of the global financial crisis washing over us, but the real choices are whether you support jobs in the economy, and we made that choice. Mr Pederick interjecting: