House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Weatherill Labor Government WEATHERILL LABOR GOVERNMENT Mr VENNING House of Assembly Schubert Mr VENNING (Schubert) (15:26): South Australia has managed a lot of firsts under the Weatherill Labor government—the highest debt and deficit in our state's history, highest taxes in the nation, highest WorkCover levy, worst business confidence according to the census business index, and the list goes on. Debt is increasing at a rate of $4 million a day. If this continues at the same rate for the next eight years, the state will be $13.75 billion in debt by 2016. Along with the highest taxes in the nation, Labor is not doing anything to help people with the escalated costs of living. The price of electricity has soared, going up 19 per cent since 1 July 2012, and this is not the only thing increasing. Gas bills are escalating, climbing by 31 per cent since 1 July 2012, and Adelaide has the highest capital city water bills in Australia. What debilitating news is that! This high cost of living is having a flow on effect on everyone, especially those in regional areas. How are rural businesses supposed to keep up with those who can take their sales online where the costs of running a shop is no longer an issue? These regional communities are suffering as their streets grow more sparse and shops close, forced into abandonment. Those struggling rural communities realise they can no longer cope with the high cost of living that the Labor government has thrust upon them. These now bare streets are about far more than just empty shopfronts, they are representing the loss to these vital communities that are the backbone of this state—the communities providing us with food and with work. The communities are suffering because Labor simply cannot fix their debt. It is not just the regional towns that are feeling these effects. Business SA chief executive, Mr Nigel McBride, reports seeing one in every three shops with a 'for sale' or 'for lease' sign on King William Road—a street supposedly one of our most thriving. The level of business confidence of our people today is the lowest in the nation, along with business conditions and wages growth. Our unemployment rate has also skyrocketed, going from 6.1 per cent to 7.1 per cent in July. Labor's plan to provide 100,000 new jobs has hardly worked well, with there being fewer jobs in South Australia now than when Labor made this promise back in 2010. There have been 16,100 more unemployed under this Weatherill Labor government. While the people of South Australia suffer, the Premier continues to ensure his government is kept nice and cosy. His advisers Mr Blewett and Mr Harvey are the two men whose actions regarding the Debelle inquiry were described by Mr Weatherill himself as unacceptable and inexcusable and who have received a combined pay increase of $107,000 since 2010. The Premier's media adviser is not doing too badly either, receiving a $25,000 pay increase and he continues to be the Premier's personal spin doctor. Why is the taxpayer's money being spent on frivolities such as the Premier's 85.5 per cent increase in speech writing costs while the rest of South Australia is fighting desperately against the debt and poor infrastructure? This is where the money should be spent. Briefly I want also to discuss an issue with council boundaries. I am very disappointed that despite support within the Barossa community for council boundaries to be realigned throughout the district, it is extremely unlikely that our public initiated proposals for boundary alignment would be successful under the current legislation. I questioned the Minister for State/Local Government Relations during estimates about the progress of a public initiated proposal to alter a section of external boundary of the District Council of Franklin Harbour and incorporate an area of land in the District Council of Cleve, and their response was not encouraging. The minister responded that no public submission for council boundary alignment has ever been successful. Given this information, it is clear that the process is flawed, needing to be reviewed and improved so that public initiated proposals that have merit and have public support are given the consideration they deserve and have some chance of success, not simply dismissed or put in the too-hard basket. I have met with Ms Margaret Wagstaff, the chair of the Boundary Adjustment Facilitation Panel, to discuss the current process for the proposal for boundary realignment to be considered. I have also tendered a submission to the Local Excellence Expert Panel review discussion paper 'Councils of the Future', calling for a review of the assessment process of public initiated submissions for council boundary alignment. Yes, it is an act of parliament that provides the framework for the current process, but a full review can examine all of the options and hopefully recommend a better model. I am very disappointed. I was hoping to achieve this before I retired, and it does not look as if I am going to. Time expired.