Address in Reply

Address in Reply

Adjourned debate on motion for adoption.

(Continued from 7 May 2014.)

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Minister for Health, Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Defence Industries, Minister for Health Industries) (10:41): I open this Address in Reply by thanking His Excellency for his speech and for opening the parliament, and congratulate you, sir, on being re-elected by this house to defend the ancient rights and privileges of the house. It is good to see you back in the chair.

I would like to thank the people of the electorate of Playford, the suburbs of Ingle Farm, Para Hills, Pooraka, Para Hills West, Walkley Heights, Valley View, and Para Vista for their confidence in me and for re-electing me to this house for a fifth time. It is an honour to represent the people of Playford in this place. This is the electorate I have lived in and, with my wife, raised my family in for the last 20 years.

As part of this Address in Reply speech I also thank the many people who assisted me in the last election. It is always difficult, having new responsibilities as a minister, to put the time into the electorate, and the people and your supporters in that electorate, that you would like. That work is largely being carried on by the staff in my electorate office. I would like to particularly thank Mary Kasperski and Diana Ly for the hard work they have done, particularly leading up to the election.

I would also like to thank the volunteers in my electorate. I would particularly like to mention councillor Jana Isemonger (who was here on Tuesday and had lunch), who not only does a couple of hours at a polling booth but, in fact, gets to the polling booth at six in the morning and stays there until 10 o'clock at night. She does not leave the Para Hills West polling booth, where she always sets up. She works incredibly hard. It is people like her who keep the Labor Party going.

I would like to congratulate new members on their election to this place, and I look forward to the maiden speeches they will be making. There is one new member in particular, not of this house but in the other place, who I would like to talk about this morning: that is, the Hon. Tung The Ngo. Tung and I first met at the famous Vietnam Restaurant run by Mr Din and his daughter Linda on Addison Road at Pennington—a great place. Tung and I first met there about 20 years ago.

Since then Tung became involved in the Labor Party. He ran for Port Adelaide Enfield Council—I think it was actually only Enfield council at the first election, before the two were amalgamated—and ran a campaign. Michael Brander from the racist National Front (or whatever the party is called) was running in those council elections at the same time.

Tung decided to stand up for the Vietnamese people of Enfield and put forward his name and, as a relatively young man, won that election with a stunning result and in fact was re-elected over and over again to represent the people. Sometimes within the days of the new PR electoral system in local government he not only got a quota for himself but in fact got two quotas, so his votes got himself and the next person up elected just on first preferences, which is quite extraordinary in local government elections.

Tung worked in my electorate office and then went on to work in my ministerial office. With Tung in my electorate office it became a sort of 'go to' place for Vietnamese around South Australia. They would come to my office because we had a Vietnamese speaker in the office and Tung worked very hard, not only for the Vietnamese community but also for the many communities of non-English speaking background, who knew they had a friend in Tung and someone who could serve them. Tung will take those networks and that work ethic into the Legislative Council and be a wonderful advocate.

Tung has not made his maiden speech yet, so I will not spoil it, but people would know that Tung came to Australia as a refugee with his sister. The boat they were on was attacked by pirates and he and his family were left to die, drifting in, I think, the South China Sea before they were picked up and rescued. It was about to go dark and the boat was going to sink—quite an extraordinary story of courage is Tung's story. It says great things about the sort of society we live in that people like Tung, first generation migrants, are elected to this place.

I think our state is certainly served very well by having people like Tung who are willing to put up their hands to be elected. Tung is universally loved. He worked in my ministerial office and made the transition very well from the electorate office to the ministerial office, working on some of the largest and most complex projects that the state has ever undertaken. He managed, as my adviser, the forward sale of the forestry rotations in the South-East, a very complex and very politically difficult project, which Tung did with aplomb and got us to a situation where we were able to negotiate with people who obviously were opposed to the sale but nonetheless were prepared to speak to the government about what conditions we could place on the sale to make sure the interests of the local communities of the South-East could be protected. That was largely because of Tung's hard work and because he had the trust of those people.

Tung also worked on the sale of the SA Lotteries licence—so, some significant projects—and he came with me when I went into the health portfolio. He was very much a 'go to' man in both my electorate and my ministerial offices, and Tung will be an ornament to the Legislative Council. I wish him very well and cannot say how pleased I am to see Tung elected.

I also thank and acknowledge Annabel Digance, Katrine Hildyard, Jon Gee, Dana Wortley and the other new members on this side of the chamber.

The SPEAKER: Of course it would be better if—

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: —if I acknowledged them by their electorates?

The SPEAKER: Yes.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: Certainly, sir. I apologise, but I can't remember their electorates at this time of the morning.

The SPEAKER: That's why you wouldn't make a Speaker.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: I congratulate them and members opposite. It is an enormous privilege to be elected to this place. In closing, I do need to use this as an opportunity to talk about what the implications might be for our public hospitals should the commonwealth government proceed with its plans as outlined in the Commission of Audit report released last week, particularly with regard to bulk-billing and Medicare. What the Commission of Audit is foreshadowing and what the commonwealth government (in a sneaky way) has been softening up the Australian public for, for a couple of months now, is the dismantling of Medicare in this country. That is going to have enormous repercussions for our public hospital system, because of course, it is a truism that early intervention is critical when it comes to good medical care.

The longer people with an illness do not visit the doctor and do not seek treatment, the more serious the illness becomes, and then, of course, the more radical and costly the interventions have to be in order to get that person well again, often involving lengthy stays in quite expensive public hospitals. What I cannot understand is why this seems to be a mystery to the commonwealth government and, indeed, to members opposite.

We all know that the critical part of our hospital system—our health system in this country—is bulk-billing. The fact is that people can go and see their GP and more often than not, if they choose their GP carefully, they will be bulk-billed. In fact, almost all GP clinics definitely bulk-bill those with concession cards—it is very unusual for them to not do that at least. Charging people to go and see their GPs will deter people from going to their GPs, and that will have a two-fold effect. Firstly, it will deter people from seeking treatment—they will delay seeking treatment—and, of course, they will become more ill. To get them better is going to take longer, it will be more costly, and often it will mean an admission to an acute bed in one of our hospitals.

The second impact will be that people, not wanting to be charged, will go to one of our free emergency departments, and the modelling that my department, the Department of Health has done, shows that even with a relatively small shift, a 2 per cent shift in people from previously free GPs into our free emergency departments, will massively blow out waiting times—five-fold we expect. So, from an average at the moment of 20 minutes, to just under 100 minutes, particularly in those triage categories of three, four and five, where people would normally be seen by a GP we are going to see enormous pressure and lengthy waiting times in our emergency departments. Our hardworking doctors and nurses in our emergency departments will have to bear the brunt of this GP tax which the Australian public are being softened up for.

When we were initially being softened up, what was being talked about was a $6 charge, and commentators and the federal government were saying that $6 is really not that much money. Of course, what we have seen from the Commission of Audit is not just a $6 charge for visiting the GP, but a $15 charge to visit the GP and then further charges for any tests or X-rays that you need done on top of the $15. If you have a relatively straightforward chest infection—we are coming into winter and the number of people with chest infections will increase (as it always does) at this time of year—even with a simple chest infection, you could be looking at a charge of about $130.

At the moment, the most you will pay is what you need to pay for your PBS prescriptions (by the time you have seen the doctor)—$15. If the doctor orders an X-ray, another $15. If the doctor orders a blood test—another $15. If the doctor writes out a script, the charge for the script goes up because of the changes that are being foreshadowed to the PBS, and then you go back to the doctor for follow-up—another $15. You are talking about a charge of almost $130 for a reasonably straightforward chest infection.

For families with multiple children, for pensioners, for people on low wages, $130 charge is going to be a significant disincentive for people going to see their GP and getting treated for those chest infections early. Instead, what is going to happen is they will hold off until they become so sick that an ambulance has to be called for and they have to be taken to the emergency department and treated for very serious illnesses like pneumonia. We are talking about the elderly and the most vulnerable South Australians having to go into hospital and being picked up by the public hospital system because they are being let down by the federal Liberal government which is seeking to dismantle one of the things that makes Australia unique, that is, a universal health care system and Medicare. I think that is an absolute disgrace.

The opposition is silent on this topic. We are always hearing the Hon. Rob Lucas come out and whinge about every single dollar which this government has invested into our public hospital system. He is never happy. A little bit of him dies every time a dollar is spent investing in our public hospital system and making sure South Australians get the sort of public health system that they deserve.

Mr Gardner interjecting:

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: Obviously, a little bit of the member for Morialta dies every time that this government invests a dollar into our public hospital.

Mr GARDNER: Point of order, sir. I take offence at what the minister has just claimed, and ask him to withdraw it.

The SPEAKER: I rule against the member for Morialta. It is just part of the tiresome argy-bargy of this chamber and politics, and he should not take offence at it.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: And, of course, you never engaged in it, sir, when you sat on the front bench.

The SPEAKER: Never.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: I guess you are reaping what you sowed, sir. What we are seeing here from the opposition is absolutely nothing on this important point which is going to have a significant—

Mr Tarzia: What about Modbury Hospital?

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: I'm more than happy, member for Hartley, to talk at length about the enormous investments this government has made at Modbury Hospital—how you have a completely revamped emergency department. Let's hear the opposition talk about Modbury Hospital. I know the member for Hartley is a bit young and a bit wet behind the ears, but maybe he should talk to some of his colleagues who have been around a little longer, like the Hon. Rob Lucas, who sat around the cabinet table and who privatised Modbury Hospital.

They didn't want Modbury Hospital in public hands. They privatised Modbury Hospital. Here we have the member for Hartley calling out, 'What about Modbury?' If the member for Hartley or any member of the opposition wants a debate about Modbury Hospital and a comparison between Labor's commitment to Modbury Hospital and the Liberal party's commitment to Modbury Hospital, bring it on.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: What we hear is the bleating of members opposite because they cannot handle the truth. The members opposite are not interested in our public hospitals. They are the hospital haters—the hospital haters who—

Mr GARDNER: 127 again. I must put on the record that I, and I am sure others, take offence at being described as 'haters'.

The SPEAKER: The ability to make points of order is not an opportunity to make an impromptu speech or to issue a denial that one is a hospital hater. I suspect that neither the member for Morialta nor anyone on the opposition benches is a hospital hater. Be that as it may, I would ask members of the opposition to restrain their offence until it is their opportunity to make a contribution to the Address in Reply. I would also ask the Minister for Health to refrain from epithets such as 'hospital hater'. Minister for Health.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING: Sir, you hate what I say but you will defend to the death my right to say it. Thank you, sir. It would be nice, just once, hearing, instead of the whingeing and whining and bleating of the opposition, and members like Rob Lucas, about the investments this government has made into our hospital. Instead of hearing that day after day, it would be lovely to hear just once—just once—from the opposition something about what their federal Liberal colleagues have planned for public health in this country and what it might mean for public hospitals in South Australia, what it might mean for emergency departments, what it might mean for elective surgery waiting lists, what it might mean for our occupancy of public hospital beds. It would be nice if just once Mr Lucas and his colleagues opposite had something constructive to say about these points and actually showed a bit of interest in health policy rather than what we have been dished up and what we were dished up prior to the last election.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:00): I rise to support the motion to accept the draft address of His Excellency Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce. In doing so, I wish to place on the record my appreciation for our Governor's service to South Australia, his duties to executive council and patronage of numerous charities, which he has undertaken over a number of years and which is expected to conclude later this year. I also extend and record my appreciation to Mrs Liz Scarce, who has attended countless civic events and undertaken her duties in support of the role of Governor for all South Australians both in the grounds of Government House and across the state.

The electorate of Bragg honours the work of father and son team, Sir William and Sir Lawrence Bragg, who were duly recognised with a Nobel Prize in the field of science. As the re-elected member for Bragg I wish to thank my constituency for the strong support that they gave me during the recent election. My re-election is something that I am very proud of and I undertake, to my electorate, to continue to represent them all to the best of my ability with pride, enthusiasm and resolve.

I congratulate all new members on their election to our parliament. You are from diverse backgrounds, and if you maintain the zeal of the aspirations reflected in your maiden speeches I expect you will serve our parliament with distinction. Regrettably, you will find that some of these aspirations will be crushed by the decisions of the government, but do not let that deter you.

Like many South Australians I was pleased to hear of the government's commitment, via the address from His Excellency, on the question of mental health. It was pleasing to me to read that there was a commitment. There was clearly an understanding that this was a large area of high need and that there was need for further mental health reform. There was a claim that there had been significant steps already taken to support those in our community with mental health and their families. I dispute that, but, nevertheless, they did claim to have spent $330 million to invest in a new modern mental health system.

Their promise, as outlined in His Excellency's address, was to establish a new independent health commission apparently to better coordinate integrated services critical to South Australians who suffer from mental health, and that they will be given a task to develop the next phase of mental health reform. Secondly, having acknowledged the growing problem in this area the government would:

Expand existing efforts to implement the positive psychology approach that Martin Seligman has introduced to South Australia.

There is no detail of this. I expect that it is a practice of high standard in dealing with psychiatric care which does not require the imprimatur of this parliament or, indeed, the government. I would have thought that if he had some good ideas that that would have been taken up by the people working in mental health and would already have been implemented. However, I will come back to the appointment of a commission in due course.

Unquestionably, the demand for services for those who are suffering poor mental health and support for their families is increasing. Depression alone has been described as the pandemic of the 21^st century. Countless reports and spiralling statistics tell us this. One of the most damning, I suggest, is that the number of deaths by suicide in South Australia—representing, of course, a tragic waste of life—now doubles the number of deaths on our roads. Some 200 people a year are recorded as having taking their own lives, and we obviously hope to curb the deaths on our roads, which number about 100 a year.

There would not be a member in this house who has not had a family member, friend, neighbour or constituent who has suffered in this way. Untreated or under-treated, it so often results in harm to persons affected, and many spousal and family relationships are destroyed, children are neglected or abused and even strangers become victims of assault or offence.

Drug and alcohol addiction often features in the comorbidity of those presenting in need. We have heard about the consequences of a failure to provide adequate services in this area. Members, especially new members, will see—as we have, particularly in the time that we have been in the parliament—alarming newspaper reports and coronial reports and inquests and the resulting recommendations from inquests, court judgements, evidence, transcript and endless government reports and reviews, and they all tell the same story and they all plead for the same respite. So the government's commitment is welcome, but is it just another empty promise?

Let us consider what has happened over the last 12 years. Starting in 2002, the Rann government convened a drug summit, which I attended, as did other members of this house. I think it came up with some excellent recommendations. It clearly understood that it had a relationship with a number of people requiring mental health services. It appointed Monsignor David Cappo, a senior member of the Catholic Church, and commissioned him to prepare an audit of the demand for services that were current in mental health and to set out a plan, culminating in what has been described as the Stepping Up report. That confirmed the demand for multiple services and the need for an extension of care services, including in the community, and in particular that that be offered to help address the increasing demand.

The government announced that it would rebuild a new Glenside Hospital, that it would co-locate drug and alcohol treatment at the new facility, that it would introduce a cultural centre, that, consistent with social inclusion, there would be retail amenities for patients and the public generally. So what happened? I think everyone would agree that those announcements, those initiatives, were a good start, but let us look at what happened. Under the stewardship of successive ministers—minister Stevens, minister Gago, minister Lomax-Smith, minister Hill and minister Snelling—this is what has happened:

1. The government sold off the three drug and alcohol treatment centres in metropolitan Adelaide before adequate replacement services had been installed.

2. They stripped services in the psychiatric wards in The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, the Modbury Hospital and the RAH North Terrace campus, downgrading acute beds to day and short-stay beds.

3. They announced the sale of 40 per cent of the Glenside campus, ostensibly necessary, they claimed, to pay for the new hospital. They did not ask the football community to pay, to sell off their assets to pay for the new stadium, but for mental health patients in this state, they demanded that it was necessary to sell off half their asset to provide for their capital upgrade.

4. They bulldozed two heritage buildings whilst under protest by local government. One was a heritage building under local government and the other by the public generally and the heritage community.

5. They destroyed the oval used by local schools, clubs and patients. The oval provided them with an open area of sanctuary, which they covered with mountains of dirt.

6. They tipped out many of the mature-age patients, who had been long-term patients, into facilities at Oakden and, with the fear and frightened response of relatives, out into the community generally before any—not any—of the promised facilities in aged care were in place.

7. They ignored the public outcry at the loss of open space and public amenity and chopped down numerous trees, repeatedly refusing over two years to answer questions in this house about what was going to be happening.

8. They dismissed the local council's concern about the felling of trees, lack of open space, unsafe and unmanageable traffic numbers, and proposed building heights.

9. They sold the central administration building, including the iconic heritage assets, to the Department of the Premier and Cabinet—they picked it up for just over a million, if I recall—and made it into a film hub.

10. They excluded the patients, families and visitors from access to the chapel on the campus and gave them the barren contemplation room. Where was Monsignor Cappo when that happened?

11. They ceased operation of the gardens and many of the programs that provided occupational therapy for patients and clients.

12. They utterly rejected the recommendations of the select committee of this parliament, chaired by the Hon. John Dawkins, recommending inter alia that there be a complete rewriting of the design of the new hospital as it clearly failed, on the evidence that it received, to reach the high world standards that were claimed.

13. They refused the advice of health professionals that the proposed model of care was also flawed against international standards.

14. They ignored the repeated complaints of nurses and health professionals who were concerned about the adverse impact that the development was having on their clients.

15. They threatened to introduce car parking fees to hospital staff and visitors, while the Film Corporation patrons got it for free.

16. They prioritised $40 million to provide new accommodation for the Film Corporation before even starting to build the new hospital—priorities completely out of sync.

17. They hosted the then premier's goodbye party at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, while mental health services were crying out desperately for funds.

18. They kept patients on the campus during construction. Why was it so bad to interfere with the sanctuary of those who were receiving services? Members might recall and new members might appreciate that the government rejected a rebuild of the Royal Adelaide Hospital partly on the grounds that it would cause distress to patients and disruption to staff. It was not good enough for those patients to put up with that, but mental health patients—who gives a toss about them? They can have a construction site going on for years next door to them.

19. They wasted the funds in progressing a preferential deal with a neighbouring landowner, which later fell over.

20. They placed patients and staff at risk when they built the new hospital without a sprinkler system. Many members will not realise that we have already had a fire in the brand new hospital, where a patient lit a fire which caught light to the mattress, and they discovered that there was no sprinkler system to protect them. It is concerning that those patients were then evacuated. They have been put into another area on the Glenside campus site while they retrofit the sprinkler system. I do not know how much that is going to cost, but I refer today to the cost and risk to human life as a result of the incompetence of this government.

Far from the beautiful world-class haven for the recovery of the mentally ill as displayed in the brochures, the plans and the publicity surrounding the announcement of this facility, what we have ended up with is a hospital crammed into the corner of the Glenside site, empty buildings left derelict on the property and an oval that is now covered in weeds. It is an absolute disgrace!

We have heard the reports, many of which have been published. After 12 years, we now have a situation where we have only 220 acute mental health beds in this state. That is a disgrace, and I refer to the Public Advocate's report to confirm that.

Mentally ill South Australians have been cruelly abandoned by this government. The condition which nurses and health professionals have to work in are an insult to the dedication of these professionals. Promises have been made with reform under the new Mental Health Act. We have had the appointment, under the Mental Health Act, of a new chief psychiatrist from New Zealand, whom I have met—she did not last long. I do not know where she is now.

We have had the government ultimately accepting, under protest, the Community Visitors program, which is to be a voice for patients and clients. We have had the Stepping Up report, a plan for mental health services, published by Monsignor Cappo. It was to cover mental health services from 2006 to 2012. Now we have had an announcement that the government is going to have a new commission to start looking at the next lot of the agenda. What has happened to the last two years?

We have had the Ernst & Young review, commissioned by the current Minister for Health, a review to stepped system care that was supposed to have been implemented by this government. Every year, we have had the Public Advocate highlighting the plight of vulnerable people, including those with mental health issues. It is one of the most disturbing reports to read in this parliament every year. I wonder whether these successive ministers even read it, because it seems they do not seem to care about what is important.

They certainly have announced more reviews, but clearly the public do not want more appointments or more bureaucrats; they want action. Unless we address the services of the inadequate 24-hour supported care services as part of the Step Up program, we will continue to have excessive demand on our acute beds. If the government is serious in this area, it will:

1. Announce that it will not further sell off the Glenside site and ensure that it is kept for the clearly growing demand, which the government acknowledges, for health services, including independent accommodation to assist those who move from acute care or, hopefully, do not get to acute care.

2. Extend the supported accommodation in the community and make available areas on the Glenside site.

3. Maintain acute services and accept that they are an important tool in the recovery of those in highest need.

4. Ensure any replacement is operating before the existing service is cut. That is critical, and it is only humane, in my view, to ensure that that occurs.

There are other areas that are in need of attention, which have been highlighted over a sustained period by the Public Advocate and others. One is that we provide mental health services to people in prison.

Some members have not been down to the Women's Prison, Yatala and to other areas of high security, and I urge those members to do so. There are people in there who have committed crimes, and they need to be rehabilitated because we need to appreciate that one day they will be released and that they are going to live in a street next to any one of us and that they need help. If they are in the Women's Prison because they have killed a child—often their own child—or their husband, they need help and assistance to be able to deal with the fact that they are separated from family and that they will be incarcerated, usually for a long time. We need to ensure that that help and assistance is there. There seems to be little charter or care for those who are in that category.

Let me highlight an even worse example of neglect by this government, and that is the practice of placing forensic mental health patients in prisons and not in hospitals. For members who are not familiar with the term, forensic mental health patients comprise those who have been found mentally incompetent to commit an offence or mentally unfit to stand trial. Pursuant to our law, a declaration is made to that effect and we treat them in another manner, as we should. Often, that requires that they are to be at James Nash House as part of their future treatment, custody or supervision, which is a dedicated forensic facility—but it is full, and it has been full for all the time that I have been in the parliament. There is a waiting list that varies from time to time between 20 and 30 persons who are waiting to get into this facility. These people are mentally unfit and they need help, and what happens to them in South Australia is shameful. What happens in South Australia is that they are placed in prison.

Why is it that other states are able to ensure that if they do not have adequate room in the dedicated forensic patient facilities like James Nash House, they are held in a hospital? That is what they do in other states. In this state, the minister has power to not only set the determinations for persons who are declared in this category, but also has the capacity to order that they be held in a prison. That is exactly what is happening in South Australia.

Why is this a problem? This is a problem because if you are in a prison and not in a hospital, you do not have nursing care. What does that mean? It means that you do not have trained people to look after you. So, we have reports, such as last year's Public Advocate report, which tells us—not that we need to be told, because we see it on the front page of the newspaper more often than not—that we find mentally ill forensic patients are held secure in their cells for up to 22 hours a day. We find stories of them being strapped to a barouche in a corridor, sometimes waiting for an admission in a hospital. That is what is being scandalously neglected by this government.

Unless the government are prepared to build a new facility—again, when they first got in, they said, 'Yes, good idea; we are going to build a new prison, we are going to build an extra facility for forensic mental health at Murray Bridge.' Well, that lasted five minutes; they cancelled it in the next budget, and we still do not have these services. But, in the meantime, at the very least provide humane services to ensure that they are treated with some dignity. They do it in other states and they should be able to do it here. It is no excuse; it is a deplorable neglect of those in need.

If the maturity of a civilised society is judged by the way we care for the most sick and vulnerable in our state, then this government needs to grow up very, very fast. I accept that there is competition for those in need and those that are vulnerable: the disabled, the disadvantaged, unemployed, homeless; it is a long list, and we do have a responsibility for them.

Let me remind members that in the 19^th century, when we established this colony, the main treatment for the mentally ill was asylum, and if necessary, placement under restraint. The way we dealt with the unsociable behaviour of people with a mental illness, sometimes associated with drunkenness, was to hold them in the Adelaide Gaol. Temporary asylum was established first at Parkside and then on North Terrace in the Botanic Gardens—there are a few ruins there still today; I mention it because it is History Month—and by 1870 the hospital, now known as the Glenside Campus of the Royal Adelaide Hospital, was opened.

By the early 20^th century, over 1,000 patients were accommodated in this service. Certainly, it included a broader spectrum of the destitute and disabled, and the campus was much larger. In fact, they had a dairy herd, they had a silkworm industry, and they had gardens; now, of course, they are squashed into a corner. It seems that advances in psychiatric treatment in South Australia are back where we started. Our mentally ill are in prisons. It is a shameful indictment on this government, and I only hope that I am wrong in being sceptical that the promise of the appointment of a bureaucrat is going to solve this problem in the Governor's address.

The SPEAKER: I remind the house that this is the honourable member's maiden speech, and I ask members to accord him the customary courtesies.

Mr GEE (Napier) (11:24): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to start by congratulating you on your election as Speaker and extend my congratulations to the Deputy Speaker on her election to the deputy speakership. I wish to acknowledge and show my respect to the Kaurna people, the traditional custodians of this land where we meet, of their elders past and present, of those that were the first to put their footsteps upon this land, and those that continue to do so today.

I congratulate all the new members to this place on both sides of the chamber and also to those in the Legislative Council. In particular, I acknowledge Annabel Digance (member for Elder), a woman who has shown great persistence and has worked very hard to be here today. I also note the return of Tony Piccolo, Tom Kenyon and Paul Caica, who fought hard battles and proved once again that sheer hard work at the coalface works. Let me congratulate the other members on their re-election, Premier Jay Weatherill, and the member for Frome, Geoff Brock, on being able to provide stable government for the people of South Australia.

I come here today not only as a politician but as someone who finds great purpose in helping other people, fighting for our northern suburbs residents and the environment in which we live. I have lived in the northern suburbs since I was three in Para Hills, later in Salisbury and for the past 30-plus years in Craigmore in my own electorate.

I wish to start by thanking the electors of Napier who, after a short four-week campaign, elected me to represent them for the next four years. I received a negative swing of about 6 per cent against the 2010 results for Napier, but I again give thanks to the electors of Napier for giving me four years to get to know them better and represent them to the best of my ability. During the campaign I met many friends and associates who know me from my time working at Holden or through the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union. Many others whom I have known in the local community where our families have played and grown up together and shared life experiences, and also those I met at the local shops, hotels, sports and community venues, all gave me their encouragement and support. Now, when we meet again, I meet them in a different role as their representative in the Parliament of South Australia.

The electorate of Napier is about 25 kilometres from Adelaide and is very diverse. I am the fourth member for Napier following in the footsteps of Terry Hemmings, Annette Hurley and Michael O'Brien. Napier has within its boundaries the old suburbs of Davoren Park, Smithfield, Smithfield Plains and Elizabeth Downs, and also the newer areas of Munno Para, Craigmore and Blakeview. Napier also includes the tranquil and picturesque town of One Tree Hill and the surrounding rural areas of Bibaringa, Gould Creek, Humbug Scrub, Yattalunga and Uleybury. The electorate is completed by the urban fringe areas of Munno Para Downs, Kudla, Evanston Park and Evanston South.

My electorate contains a fairly young population, with only 16.3 per cent of people in my electorate aged over 60. One quarter of the families in my electorate contain only one parent and 45 per cent of the workers in my electorate work in blue-collar jobs as labourers, production workers, tradespeople, technicians, machine operators or drivers. These are the people I feel most comfortable with. My electorate has a large percentage of severely disadvantaged people, high levels of intergenerational unemployment and many residents suffering with mortgage stress and struggling with ever rising costs. There are many challenges and many battles to fight but I, and the residents, am hopeful for a future that delivers prosperity, jobs and training opportunities to the area.

I arrive at this place at a difficult time for the North, a time of uncertainty due to the recent announcement of General Motors to close its Holden operations in Australia. I will discuss that in more detail later. I was born in the UK in Middlesex near London to parents Gerald Leslie, known to his friends as Les, and my mother Olwyn to whom I am eternally grateful for all her love, advice, encouragement and support that she has given me, always with patience and understanding.

I am the middle child of three. My older brother, Bill, was born a year earlier and my younger sister, Samantha, was born some time later in Australia after Mum and Dad decided to migrate to Adelaide with hope of a new and exciting future in Australia. I often give silent thanks to my parents for having the courage to come to Australia as a young couple with my brother and I, leaving their families and their old lives behind.

My parents moved the family to Para Hills in 1963 after a short stay at the migrant hostel in Elder Park on the banks of the River Torrens. Many years later I learned that my parents had been offered many old houses in the suburbs close to Adelaide at a far lower cost than the brand new house in Para Hills that we called home.

I remember how my brother and I, along with our friends from Goodwin Court—also the children of migrant families—would meet up in front of one of our houses on Saturday mornings and head off across the open land, walking for hours and only returning before dark for dinner with tales of our adventures to share with Mum and Dad. Later in life, as a young father myself, I was always saddened that my own children and their friends were not able to have these same experiences without adult supervision. It seemed that their opportunities for adventure had become smaller and more dangerous over the years.

It is these memories and those associated with school and sport that kept me in the northern suburbs all my life. I attended Para Hills High School from the first year that it opened. I had spent the previous year at Salisbury East High awaiting the completion of the new Para Hills High. Since my election, I have started visiting all the schools in my electorate. I can see that things have changed a great deal and a great deal for the better. I spent more than two hours meeting students and teachers at Craigmore High School last week. Craigmore High is a school that has been much maligned in the past but is delivering great results. There are many other schools in my electorate and there is a need for more.

I am a strong believer that if you give someone access to a good education and a job, you are giving them the fundamentals that will set them up for life. I started my working life after leaving Para Hills High to become an apprentice chef. Although I chose not to pursue cooking as my choice of career it has given me much personal pleasure and remains one of my most enjoyable hobbies. I spent many years working in the fishing industry employed as a trawler fisherman and, again, I was able to put the skills I had learned in the kitchen to good use.

It was during this time that I first met Wendy. There are some things in life that we just know to be certain. I knew at that moment that I was going to spend my life with her. Some years later I did ask Wendy to marry me and I am delighted to tell you that we celebrated our 30^th wedding anniversary just last year.

During a six-month closure of the fishing grounds, I applied for a position at Holden to earn a living until the fishing grounds opened and I could return to work as a fisherman. My six months at Holden's turned into 12 incredible years on the shop floor, involving myself in health and safety, social club, fire squad and as a representative of the Vehicle Builders Employees Federation. During this period, the duties and responsibilities of these positions were carried out before and after work and during breaks, and it was during this period that I joined the Australian Labor Party. In those early days at Holden, working on the factory floor, it was a dangerous place to work, it was a dirty place to work, it was a place where you could find yourself out the door without notice, other than with a blue slip, locally referred to as a DCM or 'Don't come Monday'.

Much has been said about working at Holden's in the good old days but the reality is that this is where you went to work if you could not get a job anywhere else. Being a shop steward or a safety rep. was risky back then and employment was tenuous but following the introduction of superannuation through the ACTU in 1985, and the 38-hour week and the award restructuring, Holden and the Federation of Vehicle Industry Unions worked together very closely to introduce massive workplace change and intensive training to the point where people were queuing up to get a job at Holden. It became the place you went to first, rather than work anywhere else. Those who did the hard yards in the so-called 'good old days'—many are still there—truly have something to be proud of.

As I said earlier, the north is a great place experiencing some tough times. I have seen this firsthand, as a resident, as a proud union official for over 20 years, and as secretary of the AMWU vehicle division over the past five years: the joy as new shifts were added and the despair as jobs were shed.

The saddest day for the north and maybe for the state was 11 December 2013 when the announcement was made that car manufacturing would end at the Elizabeth plant. This was on the back of the Ford closure announcement, and then came the inevitable announcement from Toyota. Unlike the abstract styling of the Toyota badge or the blue oval used by Ford on all of its vehicles across the planet, you only get to have the Holden lion badge here in Australia.

An expensive advertising campaign released by GM to convince consumers that it was business as usual following its announcement to close its operations was dumped almost as quickly as it started, as sales of new cars almost stalled. I am hoping that the realisation of this by the GM management will leave the door ajar for some level of local vehicle production. GM protects its brands with great vigour.

The announcement that the car industry will be leaving Australia has hit the components sector very hard. Many members here today will have workers and small businesses in their electorates who will lose their jobs or that will close down. The worst case scenario could see 12,000 people become either unemployed or underemployed. As a member in the re-elected government, I stand ready to assist workers to retrain or transition to other industries. I am committed to ensuring that we do all we can for these workers.

Since that day in December, confidence in the north has dipped. People are concerned about their employment, their mortgages and their ability to pay their bills. People are saving more and buying less; attendance at the local footy and most other events has fallen. I stand here today to say the north is a great place: a place to live, to work and to play. The north has good infrastructure, a diverse and vibrant community, and a bright future through our young people.

The key to the success of the northern suburbs is the retention of Holden in some capacity or vehicle manufacturing on the Holden site, or a mix of industry and commercial businesses on the site. The Holden site must be retained for jobs and not real estate. This site must create employment and training opportunities for local people.

It is very important that the Playford Alive concept continues and provides local young people with opportunities to gain new skills while delivering projects that bring great benefit to the area through urban regeneration. These are the skills that will be required in the north to complete the many thousands of new homes that will be built in the area between Munno Para, Blakeview and Gawler to the north.

The area also needs investment in the public realm. When I lived in Para Hills, Elizabeth was the envy of the north. It had the drive-in, the skating rink, the pool hall and the best ovals and sporting facilities. We need Playford again to be the envy of the north, to have the best streets, the best ovals and the best playgrounds for our children to enjoy themselves on. This needs to be in all areas, not just the new suburbs, but in the older suburbs where residents love their local community and have strong memories of how things were.

My commitments over the next four years are to doorknock every house in the electorate and to stay in touch with all my schools and community groups, while lobbying for more school places. I am committed to lobbying for more frequent trains at Broadmeadows and Munno Para stations and continued investigation into the provision of a public bus service to the One Tree Hill area. I have also committed to lobby the City of Playford for more community events and improvements to the public realm.

I acknowledge my predecessor, Michael O'Brien, who served the electorate of Napier for 12 years. Michael conceived the idea long ago with others of the Playford Alive urban renewal project. Michael was instrumental in the introduction of super schools in South Australia, and the introduction of school fencing in South Australia. During Michael's time a lot of infrastructure was delivered, including a new police shopfront, a new fire station and a new ambulance station, and upgraded railway stations at Elizabeth and Munno Para.

In closing, I want to thank the many people who have supported me, given me advice or been great friends during my life. I cannot mention everyone but I have to start with my parents. My father Les worked as a toolmaker. He loved to read and he hated the cold. Australia was like a paradise for him. My mother Olwyn worked at the WRE complex at Penfield and later as a PA at R.M. Williams until her retirement. Mum and dad had so many friends with so many kids that it always felt like we had visitors, or we would be at someone else's place. It was like this until I left home.

My brother Bill had great success in retail music. I have always had great respect for him and his ex-wife Kay and their children, Jodie and Dani. My wonderful sister, Samantha, who has had many challenges to overcome in her life, has been totally committed to providing care to intellectually disabled people for over 30 years. I want to acknowledge Wendy's parents, Jack and Thelma, who welcomed me into their family, and also her sister Pam and brothers Brian and Richard, who stood in as best man at our wedding. They realised something was afoot when Wendy and I traded two cars in for one.

Jack was in the British forces which enabled Wendy the good fortune of living in countries such as Cyprus, Germany and Singapore, as well as receiving a private boarding school education in England. Wendy was a successful restaurateur and has already retired once. She was climbing the walls after a month and so returned to the workforce. I am very proud of Wendy and I thank her for enriching my life.

To our children, Robbie, Matthew and Julie-Anne, we wish you the best that life has to offer. Our beautiful daughter-in-law, Haley and our grandsons, Benjamin and Franklin: we love and adore you all.

It would not be possible to end up in this place without the support of many people. I want to start by thanking my campaign director Alex Coates—he deserves high praise—and also to Brenda Larnio and Sonya Smethurst, who provided support to us all. I thank my dear friends, John and Mischelle Camillo, Mick and Julie Sanderson, Paul McMahon, Frank Barbaro and David Fabbro.

I thank the Napier sub-branch, led by Glen Armstrong, for its support and assistance through the campaign. I thank everyone who letterboxed, erected corflutes or stood at a polling booth on election day, spreading the good word. I would especially like to thank my booth captains for making sure that everything ran smoothly.

I wish to acknowledge John Camillo AMWU, Bob Donnelly CEPU, Jason Hall FSU, Peter Malinauskas SDA, Ray Wyatt TWU, Scott Batchelor AMWU, and Dave Garland NUW. I also acknowledge federal senators Don Farrell and Alex Gallagher for their support.

I thank Nick Champion and Fiona Webber, also Reggie Martin, Matt Ellis, Sonia Romeo, Aemon and Emily Bourke, Josh Peak, Mathew Werfel, Rob Klose, Caleb Flight, Deb Black and Michael Puttner for their help and support.

Lastly, I want to give special thanks to the vehicle industry workers and shop stewards who have again given their support to me. To name a few: Heinz Joham, Darryl Waterman, Leanne Obanic, Graham Thompson, Geoff Dymott, Peter Gratz, Ian Ramsay, Murray Akehurst, Paul Waldron, Dennis Masters, Billy Doe, Sue Clayton, Rob Morris, Darren Pine, Darren Thorpe, Vince Cavallaro and Robert Alberton.

The SPEAKER: The member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:45): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In my opening remarks, I would like to congratulate you on retaking the very significant post of Speaker. I certainly noted your reluctance on taking that position two days previously in this parliament. I would also like to acknowledge Madam Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees, the member for Florey, for her rise to that position.

Ms Bedford: Meteoric.

Mr PEDERICK: Meteoric, I am reminded, by the member for Florey. Well done to you both. In addressing the Governor's speech, I will acknowledge it is a speech written by the government for the Governor. I think it is important for everyone to acknowledge that, not just in this place but in the wider community.

I would certainly like to acknowledge the great way in which the Governor delivered the speech, and acknowledge his service and his wife Liz's service to this state for so many years. Kevin and Liz, if they do not mind me calling them that, are great people who have been very welcoming to me as a member of parliament, as they have been, I am sure, to every member in this place.

I know that, in the brief times Kevin has been able to get some leave during his term as Governor, he has taken some of that in my electorate at Goolwa, where I know he enjoys golf as well as relaxation down there. I wish them all the best after his role as Governor finishes up later on this year, and I would really like to again acknowledge his great service to this state and that of his wife Liz.

I would like to acknowledge the new members of this place and every other member of parliament who has been re-elected. At the risk of being cut short, I would like to acknowledge the member for Schubert, Stephan Knoll; the member for Bright, David Speirs; the member for Hartley, Vincent Tarzia; the member for Mitchell, Corey Wingard; and the member for Mount Gambier, Troy Bell, for all being new members on this side of the house. I congratulate them on their successful candidacies and also congratulate the new members on the other side of the house who have been elected. I congratulate everyone for their maiden speeches. I think there have been some great words spoken already in this house and there will be many more to come.

I would also like to acknowledge the election of the Hon. Andrew McLachlan MLC on our side of the house and, obviously, the election of the Hon. Tung Ngo MLC on the Labor side. He certainly has an interesting story of how he came to Australia, and I wish him all the best in his future role in the parliament.

In addressing the content of the speech, very early in the speech, it talks about the Hon. Dale Baker's passing. Dale was one of those—I do not think he would mind me saying—irreverent characters of the parliament. I have mentioned in this house before that I actually shore a few sheep for Dale back in the eighties. I did a lot more time working for his brother Dean. He was quite a character. If you can ever have a little bit of humour at funerals, there was a little bit at Dale's send-off as we celebrated his life and some of the things that Dale had done. I thought some of the eulogies that were presented that day were some of the best I have ever heard and I salute his service to this state. It was a pleasure, in the time before I was elected, working with Dale Baker as a Liberal.

I would also like to acknowledge Mr Ivon Wardell who passed away in November last year. Ivon's first wife, Dorothy, taught me music many years ago, and I do not remember much of it but he was a great man. I had not contacted Ivon for decades and yet when I got elected he came on board and came to my Christmas functions and I really appreciated that. I was saddened to hear of his passing and I certainly made sure that I attended his farewell. I really appreciated his support in my career.

I will just address other parts of the Governor's speech. A couple of aims of the government are realising the benefits of the mining boom for all and premium food and wine from our clean environment. I think this will be a challenge for the government. Certainly, I have been involved in the select committee into farming practices in this state and I have had a couple of mines previously in my electorate—I still deal with them, even though with redistributions you lose or gain some land; in my case, I have lost some country—and it is difficult to get that interface to work. I am certainly of a mind that both industries need to operate. We do need to realise the mining potential but we cannot do it at the risk of our primary production either.

It is hard work but I think a lot of it can be done a lot better by early consultation by miners, by mining companies working with their exploration companies and, I guess, their subcontractors to a degree to make sure that access arrangements are worked out long prior to any problems emerging with property owners. Also, people need assurance that there will not be any harm done certainly in the longer term, and even in the short to mid term, for their properties. It is a difficult path to tread but I certainly think, for a state that has really succeeded with agriculture and mining over many years—over the life of the state, in fact—we need to get both industries to work, but it is challenging.

We also note from the speech that in August 2012, BHP Billiton announced that it would delay plans for its expansion of Olympic Dam. I can understand why BHP made that decision but it saddened me to think that the biggest uranium and copper project was going to be delayed. BHP were going to have to spend $30 billion before they got a cent back and it was a huge operation. It would probably have involved taking off the overburden for about four years and creating essentially a mound of overburden of over 6,000 hectares that would have to be scraped off before getting to the ore body. I know they are looking for other ways to mine it but one of the main reasons was just the sheer cost of getting to the ore body before realising benefits not only to the state but to shareholders. The ore body has not gone anywhere. It is still here and I wish BHP Billiton all the best in its endeavours in how it is going to mine that ore body.

I also want to glance over and have a look at the comments about Holden closing its Elizabeth plant in 2017. Yes, it will be a sad day, as we just heard from the member for Napier, if what Holden's have said they will do comes through. We have many Holden cars in my family. We have had an HQ V8 wagon, 308 automatic, and it must have been one of those cars built mid week because there is nothing wrong with that car, and it went fairly quickly if you needed it to. We have an HZ Statesman, which my brother has control of. He is going to rebuild it, he tells me, but it is parked in pieces in one of the sheds on my farm. I am sure it will get rebuilt one day. I am the proud owner of a 1989 model VG Holden ute that I need to spend a bit of money on to get it in better order.

They are great vehicles, and it will be sad for the whole community. With the right outlook, if Holden's do go through—and it sounds like they will, because the decision was finally made in Detroit, regardless of what government money from governments of either side was put up, that they will be leaving the state—I think there is great potential for other opportunities out in the north for industry and IT services.

I note that in the Governor's speech there is commentary about the $3.4 billion of infrastructure projects. The problem for me is, as the speech says, this includes 19 privately funded projects in and around the city that are in the approval pipeline or in case management. I would like to see more of these projects benefiting the regions. We are told we are going to get that focus in the regions, and we will make sure that we put plenty of pressure in place from this side of the house and that we do get that focus to get that infrastructure, whether it is built infrastructure or road infrastructure, into the regions.

I also go to another part of the Governor's speech, where he mentioned that, 'Our economy depends heavily on our capacity to retain our brightest minds and attract talented professionals from interstate and overseas. But they need more than a great place to live—they need a great job.' They need, he stated, 'A strong growing economy as the foundation from which South Australians can build full rich lives and protect the things that we love most about our state.' I could not think of better words.

The issue we have is, apart from attracting talented professionals from interstate and overseas, we must find a way to retain our young professionals here. We have heard in the leader's contribution to the Address in Reply debate that over 30,000 young people recently have left this state because they do not have the opportunity. We need to retain people in this state as well as attract bright minds and individuals here to make this economy grow.

I note that the government is going through a process of developing the new Department of State Development and it will become the agency that is the principal driver of economic development in South Australia. From what the Governor's speech says, it will bring together a range of development activities, such as employment and training programs and industry and business development for both small and large businesses, as well as supporting the energy and resource sectors, science and innovation, and trade.

I tell you what, I wish this department all the best, because there is a lot of work to do. There is a lot of work to do in this state. There is so much opportunity that just has not been realised by this government of over 12 years. There is a huge opportunity in this state and we need to embrace those opportunities. The government needs to get on the ball and get those opportunities realised.

The speech mentions that the government will also give the Economic Development Board carriage of the Jobs Acceleration Fund. The Jobs Acceleration Fund has been created to hasten the availability of job and training opportunities to those with the highest need, in particular South Australians adversely affected by sectoral change or experiencing intergenerational unemployment. I applaud that; that has to happen.

I note the $10 million that has been put forward for the Jobs Acceleration Fund for the member for Frome's (the Minister for Regional Development) agreement with the government. It could not happen sooner. We need that funding, especially in regional areas, where there are high rates of unemployment. I note the unemployment levels in Murray Bridge of 10.3 per cent. I know they are not as bad as in some areas of the state, but it saddens me when I see that level of unemployment in the area that I love.

With regard to another part of the speech, the Governor reflected on the South Australian public sector and talked about its renewal and how it must demonstrate its commitment to bold innovative approaches and encourage other sectors to follow. What I would encourage people to do is have a look at what the new member for Bright's contribution was about the public sector in this place only yesterday. I think for a bloke who worked in the office of premier and cabinet he certainly had an inside view, so it is not someone outside making a comment about the public sector.

I have never worked for the public sector apart from, I guess, you could say in public life as a member of parliament, but this was a view from the inside about the disenchantment, the morale that has just dropped to zero, and the nepotism. I would commend people, certainly in the government, to read the member for Bright's contribution and seek change so that people will endeavour to work for our Public Service and not just work for the Public Service, but work for the people of South Australia and put the state first. That is what we need in all levels of employment, especially in relation to the Public Service when one in eight voters in this state are members of the Public Service.

I also want to reflect on parts of the speech about the South Australia-India Engagement Strategy and the South Australia-China Engagement Strategy and the talk about expanded exports. I think there are huge opportunities in both areas; billions of people who we can form trade with. I know Prime Minister Abbott is working towards a free trade agreement with China and I think it will bring great things to this state and this country if that can be developed. I note the free trade agreements that have been negotiated throughout Asia in the last couple of months by Prime Minister Abbott and his government and this can only bring more rewards to our producers in this state and our suppliers of goods to increase the wealth of this state, so I applaud those strategies. I just hope the government can make sure that we get the best results that we can. I also note in the speech the comments:

We also benefit from significant inbound investment in mining and resources sourced from China, as well as in local construction…

I acknowledge in relation to Murray Zircon up at Mindarie—I do not have any of that patch now in my electorate after the redistribution—the Chinese investment of $40 million to get that mine back on its feet and fix the rehabilitation. I think there is room in this state for coinvestment. If we do not have that coinvestment then sometimes things do not happen, so I applaud that investment. I think people need to look outside the square more, to look at opportunities to make businesses and mining ventures grow in this state.

I now want to address the Premier's agreement with the member for Frome and this is commenting straight from the speech:

…to support stable and effective government includes an undertaking to develop charters for stronger regional policy and for small business. These charters outline a series of commitments and initiatives that will ensure that my government will be more responsive to the needs of South Australia's regional communities and business community.

Well, on this side we wait with baited breath. The regions have been neglected for the last 12 years and we want to see some action. We want to see some action in the regions. I know the government has set up its committee with the five ministers on it to look at the regions. We have set up an internal working committee, the Regional Affairs Committee, which I am chair of and it is working across the breadth of the Liberal Party.

All of our shadow ministers and all of our people over here are on board because we represent the regions from the far West Coast down to the lower South-East. I am so proud to say that we represent right down to the bottom of the lower South-East now with the member for Mount Gambier finally getting that seat of Mount Gambier into Liberal hands. So, we have that broad representation and we aim to probe the government to make sure that we do get those commitments for the regions.

I note the member for Frome's agreement to get $39 million in the regions. That is commendable, but he could have probably asked for the close to $120 million of commitments that we put up and I think Premier Weatherill would have agreed to it. However, we will keep working on it. We have got many projects and issues that we can chase.

The government says it is committed to improving the operating environment for small business and reducing red tape. Well, I am not going to hold my breath. I hope it happens, but it needs to happen sooner rather than later. People are burdened by the cost of running businesses in this state, and I get tired of hearing about people who have had enough who decide they are going elsewhere to run their businesses.

The government says it will work with primary industries in the regions and take responsibility in food manufacturing. I hope they do put some more money into primary industry in the regions, because there has been close to $100 million pulled out of the primary industry budget since this government was elected. There is a whole lot of money there that could be reinstated to primary industries to make our primary industries work a lot better.

They get taken too much for granted, especially our broadacre farmers and livestock producers. It is great to have the premium foods and wines, fantastic, but where our main income comes from—the land—it is from the bulk commodities, and that is a fact. It is bulk commodities, and they need to be recognised in the same way as some of the more high-priced items that we produce on our great land.

I note that the government has an aim to work closely with the Local Government Association, regional local government bodies and individual councils. Perhaps it will pick up our policy of $50 million in funding to assist loans for infrastructure builds, which would put $500 million of funding proposals into the regions.

I see the government talking about the Education Act, talking about the better needs of our children, and I will address that further later on in my speech. However, one thing I will talk about here, in the Governor's speech, is that the rate of suicide in South Australia is unacceptable, and in rural areas the rate is significantly worse than in metropolitan areas. This is an issue I spoke of only yesterday in this place, in a grieve. It is distressing, the contacts you have with people, especially the constituent I mentioned yesterday and the fact that, to keep her son alive, she had to have him detained under the Mental Health Act because he had threatened to kill himself three times. It is very, very distressing.

With regard to the election, I acknowledge the re-election of the member for Fisher, the Hon. Dr Bob Such. As the Governor did in his speech, and as many people in this house already have, I wish Dr Such all the best in his recovery. It was great to see him the other day. I hope that, for his sake, he makes his health the number one priority.

In my closing minutes I would like to comment on issues closer to home in the seat of Hammond. First, I would like to thank all the people of Hammond who voted for me in my re-election for my third term. I promise to continue working hard on building a positive future for Hammond. Hammond has had its troubles. We have had the drought that started back in 2006, and we have had massive redistributions. In my first redistribution I lost Strathalbyn and picked up Goolwa, and in this redistribution I went from 15,000-odd square kilometres to 6,000-odd square kilometres, because 9,000 square kilometres of farming country went up to the seat of Chaffey. I am not sure if the—

Ms Bedford: You could walk it now.

Mr PEDERICK: Nearly; ride a bike across it almost—but that will not happen either.

An honourable member: A suburban electorate.

Mr PEDERICK: Yes; I do not know if Tim needed the extra margin that that afforded him, the member for Chaffey.

Mr Whetstone: Gratefully accepted.

Mr PEDERICK: Gratefully accepted. I guess the thing that saddens me is that when you look at 9,000 square kilometres, out of that there were only about 2,200 voters, and that is a lot of country. You have electorates in Adelaide over which you can put a postage stamp and can walk one from one end to the other without hurting your hip.

Mr Pengilly: Hear, hear!

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you, the member for Finniss—a fellow traveller in hip surgery. It makes you think. I want to repay the faith the voters of Hammond have put in me, and I promise to work diligently in everything they ask of me.

I raise a few issues relating to Murray Bridge, Tailem Bend and throughout the electorate—Langhorne Creek and Goolwa. I refer to the Murray Bridge Racing Club, the Gifford Hill redevelopment. A lot of people say to me, 'This is just a racing club proposal; why do you want to fund them?', because we put up a $15 million proposal to match the $5 million from the federal government. I said, 'Because it's not just about racing; it's about housing development, about unlocking land for a sports precinct, and also about the domino effect of getting a bulky goods precinct in Murray Bridge.'

Over decades—and it will be over decades—I believe it will unlock $1 billion of investment, but the project has stalled. The racing club has invested $13 million and, like everywhere, the money in regional South Australia is tight, very tight. I am hoping that ministers Bignell and Brock will look carefully at this and take this proposal through to Premier Weatherill, as I have done, to push for funding from the state government in its regional financing package so that we can realise the potential of that project.

I acknowledge the Tailem Bend Motorsport Park and the involvement of the Peregrine Group and the Shahin family here. I welcome the government's commitment of $7.5 million, I will follow that closely to make sure that commitment happens, and I am sure it will—they have said it will—and who cannot believe a government?

The Hon. A. Piccolo: More sarcasm!

Mr PEDERICK: I said, 'Who cannot believe a government?' I think that this was the ideal choice for a motorsport park in South Australia. We also need to make sure the government is held to account on its commitment to regional South Australia and the importance of primary industries—areas like the fabulous Langhorne Creek wine region, where Lake Breeze and other wineries won so many more awards at the Langhorne Creek wine luncheon only last Friday.

I refer to the Coorong and Lower Lakes fishery, the Mallee grain producers and the livestock producers, the massive egg and poultry farms in our area, the Mypolonga horticulture and fruit growing areas further throughout the electorate. We must also make sure that local industries that are doing well in the area, that are underpinning the state's economy with hundreds of millions of dollars investment and are generating billions of dollars of income for this state.

To name just a few of the bigger ones from my area: Thomas Foods International; Australian Portable Camps; Swanport Harvest and Staycrisp Lettuce; Adelaide Mushrooms; Big River Pork; and, numerous chicken farms that I mentioned before. As we all know, there are always regional transport concerns. We always need better transport to our country towns, especially areas like Goolwa, Hindmarsh Island and Murray Bridge. I believe that over time we will get a public-funded metro ticket transport. I know it has to be funded publicly, but it will give so much more opportunity for people to still live in a regional area and be able to access the city in a cost-effective manner.

Health services are something about which I talked in the parliament as recently as yesterday. They all need attention, especially when you have areas like Goolwa and Murray Bridge that do fall not fall under the patient assistance transport scheme because they drop out of the 100-kilometre limit. We need to make sure that with a population growth and an ageing demographic that people can access their health services.

We have education issues, local schools, and job cuts at the local TAFE in Murray Bridge. We have the slow response time, and I know that the Lameroo school has gone out of my electorate, but four of its school buildings burnt down last October, and we are still no closer to knowing whether or not those buildings will be totally replaced.

I have already mentioned the unemployment rates in the area—and I am running out of time, which is a bit of a disaster! With regard to the River Murray, as I mentioned earlier, in the drought of 2006 we not only had the dryland drought, but we had the river and irrigation drought to the lifeblood of Hammond and there are so many industries and towns that rely on the health of the river. We have the Lower Murray flood plains that need work, and I want to acknowledge and make further comment later about Henry Jones and his sad passing—a true champion of the Murray—and if the Murray-Darling Basin Plan should be attributed to one man, it should be him.

In my closing remarks I would like to thank all my family, my supporters and my staff: to my wife Sally, my sons, Mack and Angus; to Greg O'Brien, his wife Teresa; to Karen Parker, Neville and Marie Mueller, Rob and Jan Smyth, Norm and Margaret Patterson, Neville and Judy Woolcock, Liam O'Neil; and the Hammond SEC executive and all of their families. I would like to acknowledge all the membership down at Goolwa—a great team who handed out how-to-vote cards on the day. All the volunteers—everyone who helped with the whole process. My staff members: Kim Duffield, Diane Bolton, Liam O'Neil, and all the trainees I have had over time, especially Emma Kluske, the most recent. I would also like to make special mention of Jan Henderson and her husband, Brian, from the Goolwa branch and I am looking forward to another term as the elected member for Hammond.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Hildyard): The member for Florey.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (12:16): Thank you, Acting Speaker. I acknowledge this government meets on Kaurna land and pay my respects to elders past, present and future. I am also mindful of the contribution all members who have gone before me and us have made in this place to this state and the honour it is to be elected to represent your local community in such a forum. In these early days of the 53^rd Parliament of South Australia, I put on record my thanks to the electors of Florey for placing their trust in me yet again. I will always strive to be worthy of that trust and undertake to serve them to the best of my ability.

During the election campaign, undertakings were made in each electorate that became part of the policy taken to the people of this state. This policy platform is something this government will begin to implement and it has done from the very first day of sitting. I commend the Governor for his speech, and would also like to take this opportunity to thank Governor Scarce and Mrs Scarce for their dedication to their roles and their commitment to South Australia.

There is much to be done to deliver the vision taken to the election and I look forward to being part of the government delivering the policies that will contribute to the progress that will be made in this state. At a local level, education and health remain key services and I know the undertakings to improve courses at The Heights School have already seen discussions put in place. The challenge will be to deliver opportunities for students looking to improve their skills so they can make a successful transition to the workforce and to meaningful paid employment.

All teachers make a significant contribution to the state through their work in nurturing and developing the young people in their care and I thank them for their dedication to their vocation. For someone who has an entire family of teachers surrounding them—all my siblings and their partners are teachers—I know what goes into preparing the work that is taken to school campuses every day.

Florey is home to the Tea Tree Gully campus of TAFE and this continues to be a hub for local students, assisting them in reaching their study and employment goals. The emphasis on promoting South Australia as a destination for further education is another important aspect of this government's strategy to make this state the education state, and there is a great deal of work going on to keep South Australian universities among those most in demand, particularly for international students.

With regard to health, the Modbury Hospital remains a focus of local health service delivery, and I am very happy to report that I have heard such good remarks about the work being done in the accident and emergency area since it was upgraded. The staff has great morale and it is wonderful to see the hospital really humming and only mentioned in a good way, which is marvellous. We have good mental health services and a rehab service will soon be in place which will cater for the ageing population of our area. I include myself in that because, as the member for Hammond pointed out, trudging the footpaths in the local area can be very dangerous—a lot of footpath falls!

The Modbury Hospice has a reputation for delivering exceptional care, and our thanks go to those dedicated nurses and doctors who help people like us face such difficult circumstances. Something that happens so rarely for us confronts these workers on a daily basis, and their work and efforts are truly valued.

With winter coming, it is always a very busy time in emergency departments all over the state, and I thank all the medical personnel and the ambulance personnel for their diligence and the care they deliver every day. It is a good time to reflect and remind people of the importance of prevention strategies in health services and to ensure that they remain a focus of the health initiatives of this state. To that end, flu vaccinations are a very easy frontline initiative and are recommended for those vulnerable to the ever-resilient flu strains that appear and are a scourge on us every season. If members have not already done so in their electorates, it is good to take the message about vaccinations against flu, particularly for older residents.

Again, locally, the work will continue on the public transport needs of our area, with the O-Bahn remaining a mainstay, a jewel in the crown of our public transport system and a continuing source of commuter confidence. The work of bus drivers is an essential service, and I thank them for their diligence. It's a very hard job that we tend to take for granted until they are not working, which is when we all realise how valuable their contribution is to our daily lives. The park-and-ride car park facility has proven to be hugely popular with weekday commuters and is now winning a great following for weekend activities like shopping, entertainment pursuits and the arts and, most particularly, sport, with football at the new Adelaide Oval, a venue that, as far as I know, has had almost complete universal approval.

Florey is an electorate with only a very small amount of light industry. It is maintained by a large retail sector and small businesses. Therefore, family businesses and small to medium enterprises provide the backbone of employment stimulus in our area. It is good to be able to say to those businesses that this is a government that holds them as a priority.

We also have a large number of retirement villages in Florey. It is a place where I know the recent review of the Retirement Villages Act was noted with great interest, and it was a topic of one of our most recent public forums which we hold in conjunction with the member for Newland. We have a very interesting agenda of forums coming up in the next few months, which I will tell him about shortly.

We have a great number of community groups and sporting clubs in Florey, and volunteers are involved in just about everything you can imagine. We are lucky to have every activity, every sort of outcome, sport and whatever you name in Modbury, with one of the largest centres in South Australia's suburban area. I think it is second only to Marion, which we can't have for very much longer: we will have to supersede that.

We have a great SES and CFS close by us, and an RSL which serves our defence personnel and their families. I might add, too, that they have great jazz on Sunday afternoons, so I highly recommend, if you are out our way, particularly in winter when it is very cold, that members come along and have a listen to some great jazz.

Statewide, and more broadly, maintaining the momentum of building a better and stronger South Australia remains as we face the future together. Even in a period when changes to employment will face many workers, we must instil in the community the necessity to embrace the changes and opportunities that are coming. That is easy to say, I know, but it is a time of change that can deliver something good to us. The undertaking to represent all South Australians is something the Weatherill government takes very seriously.

The new Royal Adelaide Hospital is rising above the formwork and beginning to resemble the world-class medical facility that it will soon become. Likewise, the SAHMRI building has begun its important work and the employment transition from construction site to the medical centre of excellence it will be known as worldwide. There are already very new and exciting discoveries coming from scientists here in Adelaide and this trend will continue to grow over the ensuing years. I know that, with SAHMRI operating and as it begins to take up its full potential, we will see some amazing outcomes.

Sustainable energy and a thriving food and wine sector are emerging industries and, along with tourism and the arts, will keep South Australia among the world's best cities. Mining and manufacturing are in transition and the jobs that will be generated will come online as we urgently need them to help transition the workers from the car industry into other employment. Workplace safety and a strong WorkCover scheme must underpin all jobs in South Australia.

There can be no more important an area of concern than strengthening families and the protection of children, and it is no surprise that the child before eight is the adult we end up with. The ability to adapt and be resilient in many situations is the way to make sure the relationships of the future are strong and stable. Violence in all its forms is to be abhorred, particularly violence against children and women. Recent dreadful incidents show us that more needs to be done to name the behaviour that causes such devastation.

Seventy women have died this year at the hands of their partners, or former partners, and children have also met terrible ends. The real, insidious impacts manifest themselves in troubled individuals condemned to repeat this destructive behaviour, and so the problem goes on and on. Let's all redouble our efforts to find a way to make a difference, just as the workers in this sector endeavour to do each and every day. Our thanks to them seems little in the face of situations that confront these front-line workers in such a workplace.

Affordable living is another major influence on the government's deliberations. We know the value of a dollar; I certainly do at the end of a month, and I am sure that everybody else in here does as well. It is even more difficult for those relying on low fixed incomes permanently. Keeping concessions at a realistic level is a major consideration, along with the ways to maximise and keep the consumption of utilities such as power and water affordable.

The collaboration with the state and federal governments to deliver services and opportunity for all will be a priority. Our Premier is not afraid to take the case of this state up at the highest levels and with those who would make decisions that will have a negative impact. We call on all elected representatives to make their stand for this state and always put the welfare of our state's people first. Attacks on pensions, disability services and Medicare must be debated so everyone understands the issues and realises exactly what is at risk. I am sure that with wide debate in these areas everyone will work very hard to maintain what we have.

One of the things beholden on all of us here is the necessity to inspire the confidence of electors in the holders of public office. To this end, we must work to raise the level of trust electors have in us and our agendas. We must take the work of parliament to the people and offer every opportunity to provide information to the people we work for, the very people who want to believe in what we all stand for and that we will indeed deliver.

One particular undertaking pre-election was the commitment of the government to establish a gallery to complement the visits of school students and the public alike to Parliament House. It is hoped it will go some way to replace the old Constitutional Museum and tell the story of government and voting in this state, with a particular emphasis on the story of women's dual enfranchisement. South Australia was of course the first place in the world to extend dual enfranchisement—the right to vote and the right to stand for election—to women, and this new gallery will be another world first in that there is no other institution like it dedicated to this achievement in any other nation.

It will also tell the story of Australian women's participation in helping women in the United Kingdom to win the vote, particularly the role of Muriel Matters, the first woman to speak in the House of Commons. A section of the grille on display in centre hall, on loan with the kind assistance of the Palace of Westminster and our clerk, is a link to that protest and our heritage in the system of parliament which we embrace and in which we all participate.

The restoration of Old Parliament House is a wonderful project, soon to be unveiled for all to see. The building, which saw the beginning of representative democracy in this free colony, has been saved basically from falling apart. It has been money well invested in the history of our state. The old chamber has been brought back to life, and several beautiful meeting rooms have been created from cramped almost unusable space. Ours is a very compact parliamentary precinct, and this work will make for a much better environment for the staff supporting our work.

To close my Address in Reply remarks, I would like to thank the Premier for his leadership in the campaign and for visiting Florey on so many occasions. I know he will return as often as possible, because I will be issuing invitations, and it will be to keep him connected to the issues in our community. His efforts were supported by many fine and dedicated volunteers who believe in building a better South Australia, and they facilitated successful interactions that have led to good outcomes for our local area.

Thanks also to the Australian Labor Party office staff who assisted during the campaign. My gratitude also goes to my wonderful sub-branch members, especially those who attend meetings and who are involved in the campaigns. I would also like to thank team Florey, my campaign team and helpers, too many to name individually. Well, that is probably not true when you listen to some of the lists I have heard in the last couple of days. I will not be naming them all today, but they do know who they are and they know how grateful I am for everything they have done. Our shared achievement is remarkable more so because we do so much without any machine behind us and on a shoestring budget.

As the cost of campaigns rises, so too do the impediments for ordinary community members to run for public office. It is a very worrying trend, as parliament must be a place for all voices, and this will only continue to be possible if we contain expenditure on campaigns and make them information sharing periods and a contest of ideas rather than marketing exercises.

The days of unlimited spending should be brought to an end, and it may well be that the investigations and deliberations should be around capping campaign costs rather than attempting to construct a set of campaign fundraising rules. It is simply unsustainable to have unlimited campaign spending, and I look forward to participating in the debate around future measures.

I would also like to put on record my thanks to the Electoral Commission of South Australia, especially the Florey returning officer and his staff. The Electoral Commission faces challenges in making sure we get a timely result, hopefully on the night of the election. The trend for many people to take advantage of pre-poll voting is making this a very difficult task.

If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes many, many people to maintain and inspire an MP. I thank everyone who has lent a hand in making my participation at this high level possible. I thank the staff of the Florey electorate office, who worked tirelessly for the community and are dedicated to offering a level of service that we would all want for our families. I am sure that this is what we all hope our officers provide.

To my colleagues here in this place, I look forward to working with you over the next four years. This leads me to my family, who share my desire to have a happy place to call home in the best possible community. I look forward to continuing to serve my community.

'Community counts' has been my philosophy since first becoming elected or even since being involved with committees at the kindy and the schools my children attended, because we live in a community, not just an economy. It is a slogan that still holds true and resonates broadly because people want to be the centre of our deliberations when setting responsible budgetary goals.

We have seen the results of cuts and austerity in many other countries and know that the responsible course is to take people with us, leaving no-one behind. Every person is important and so is their contribution to this state. Shared prosperity is this government's aim. We will work hard to deliver and we will be judged by our results.

Someone famous—and I cannot remember who—once said, 'a seat in parliament is not a reward for past services; rather, it's an opportunity for further work.' I commend the government's agenda and look forward to working hard to achieve its vision.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite) (12:32): It is with great pleasure that I rise to congratulate the Governor on his wonderful address to the joint sitting. The Governor is doing an absolutely fantastic job representing this state. As one would expect from a senior Royal Australian Naval Officer, he is commanding the ship of Government House with sincerity and firmness. It is wonderful to see him at work.

I am not what one might call a Republican in the sense that I have never had trouble identifying myself as an Aussie, but I firmly support our constitutional arrangements, including our present arrangements in respect of governors-general and governors. I think it provides something above the gritty business of politics, which people can hold up and respect, something that is very important for charity work and for other purposes. We have seen that demonstrated this week through this address, and it is wonderful to be in a position to reply to it.

First of all, I will talk of my electorate of Waite, the suburbs from Netherby and Springfield right through to Mitcham and Kingswood, down through Lower Mitcham and into Colonel Light Gardens and Westbourne Park and, of course, into the new areas that have come into Waite, such as St Marys. I grew up in Panorama and went to Marion High School. I enjoyed walking each day through St Marys, and it was wonderful to be out there during the campaign doorknocking through the streets I knew so well and where most of my schoolmates had come from. In fact, I even happened to pass the Greens candidate's house as I was doorknocking in one street. I walked by the front and saw a Greens sign out the front and thought, 'I won't bother with that one; I'll just go to the next house.' The next thing I knew he sprang out of the front door and we had a little chat in the street.

I commend both the Greens and the Labor candidate; in fact, all the candidates in the Waite campaign. It was a very well-run campaign. Everyone acted with considerable respect and dignity, which was good to see. That was not the case in all electorates. That was a decent one, and I commend all the candidates for the effort they put in.

I also thank the many volunteers who helped with my campaign. I am supported by a wonderful group of members and volunteers in my local branch of the Liberal Party in Waite. They are terrific people. I want to particularly commend Milan Perisic, who must be the most accomplished director of corflutes in the country. If Milan puts a corflute up on a telegraph pole, it will take an earthquake and Cyclone Tracy to remove it. I intend to have him coaching all the young volunteers in the process at the next election, because he is getting on. I will not mention his age, but he may be sitting in a chair giving them directions. Let me assure any potential candidate in the seat of Waite that they will have trouble pulling down the Hamilton-Smith corflutes if Milan Perisic has had anything to do with it.

Members interjecting:

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: I see volunteers springing up from around the chamber to get out their flamethrowers, but it was a wonderful group of volunteers stuffing envelopes, sending out printed material and getting on the phone. I particularly mention Jane Johnston at my office, who is one of the more senior PAs in the system, and the staff, Ben Page and Amy Guilliam, who did a wonderful job supporting me as well. I thank my family—both my immediate family and extended family, but all who were involved in what was a pretty interesting and exciting campaign.

We picked up some new areas that were hostile territory, according to the polling. I am pleased to say that I had some good swings in those new booths to the Liberal Party and held comfortably to my margin, which was not the case in all Liberal-held seats. There were some interesting swings, but we held on pretty well in Waite. I thank the people of this wonderful district in which I was born, grew up, have owned businesses, where nearly all my family live and which has been my home for nearly all of my life for their support. It is an honour to be re-elected.

I congratulate the new members who have come into the house on all sides. I have listened to nearly all of the addresses in reply so far and I look forward to hearing the remainder. It is an honour to be elected. I see that we are refreshed and renewed on all sides with some very high-calibre people from both major parties. It is a credit to the community that they put such good people forward.

I recall my own first Address in Reply, my maiden speech, and the enthusiasm and optimism that comes with being a new member. I hope that the flame is burning just as brightly 10 or 20 years from now, but that is the challenge: to maintain one's enthusiasm, one's rage for justice, for progress or for whatever it is that members have staked their claim to in owning their seats. It is a great honour. It has been my observation that everybody in this place, I think, is here doing their very best and with the very best in mind and in heart for the people they represent. We have different views. Often those views bring us into conflict, but I think just about everybody—there are always some cruisers who are here for themselves in any enterprise, and that would include parliaments all around the world. However, I think the overwhelming majority of people are here doing their very best for whatever it is they believe in and for whatever it is that is their cause, and that is what gives life to this place.

I will go over the good, the bad and the ugly of the last four years and talk then about the future, because I think the government has done some good things, some bad things and at times has been a little ugly. Let me start with the good things because, to be fair, the government has, I think, kicked some goals. I will start with the Adelaide Oval. As the person who first put Adelaide Oval on the political agenda, I am glad that the government finally saw the light and agreed with the idea I was promoting.

I do remember that when I first got out there and said that football must come into the city, the Labor Party were running down rabbit burrows everywhere saying, 'No, no, no. It will never happen on our watch,' throwing money at West Lakes, going around and offering to give the SANFL whatever it took to get this off the political agenda, describing Hamilton-Smith's plan for football in the city, the re-enlivenment of City West, extending the Convention Centre and doing it all up alongside the riverbank—it was 'Marty World', it was Las Vegas on the Torrens. It was never going to happen under Mike Rann.

It was quite apparent that over there in the cabinet was the now Premier and a few others thinking, 'You know what, that agenda that Hamilton-Smith is talking about is not so bad, and maybe Rann and Foley need to get out of the way so that we can roll it out.' Well, lo and behold, Mr Rann and Mr Foley were gotten out of the way, and suddenly I am seeing 'Marty World' unfold along the Torrens. I am delighted that the government got with the agenda and realised that, having poo-pooed the idea of extending the Convention Centre and doing up the entire precinct and bringing football into the city finally got with the plan. I am very happy to see it happen.

I note with interest that those people from various quarters who were huffing and puffing about opposing Adelaide Oval were nowhere to be seen at the showdown I attended. They were nowhere to be seen—and they were from all sides of politics. As I predicted, it was a roaring success, and I commend the government for delivering it. Although they did need a little bit of prompting, a bit of help from me, they finally got there. It just goes to show you that from opposition you can get results.

I have some further ideas. I would like them to consider a six-star hotel down there. I would like them to go further with their plans for the city; I would like them to come up with something a little bit more exciting for the Parklands and various other things. I will keep getting out there with my ideas, and I hope that the government continues its practise of implementing them for me, which is a wonderful thing.

The government has done some good things. Of course, there are only a few good things the government has done. Sadly, the government has also made some terrible mistakes and some massive blunders.

There is just this one little problem the Labor government has, and I note that it is a problem that a lot of Labor governments have, and that is that they love to spend money, and they have wonderful ideas and plans about how to spend it. There is always a cause that needs attending to, there is always someone somewhere who needs to be flowered with the taxpayers' money. They just have one little problem: often, they cannot figure out how to pay for it. This is a problem.

My wife has this same issue, and I am sure that many people's spouses have this issue. They do love to spend but, sadly, we have to pay the bills at the end of the week. This is a fundamental thing that I think Labor MPs need to learn. It needs to be somehow included in the induction process when they come into this place. Perhaps the whip could run a small program in learning how to pay the bills for all Labor MPs when they come into the house so that they get it into their head that you just cannot go around spending, spending because sooner or later you have to pay.

If you do not live within your means, you have to do things such as run up the debt to something like $14 billion; you have to do things such as run deficits of well over $1 billion; you have to do things such as go to Canberra to beg for a bailout. Those things are quite embarrassing because, in effect, what you are doing then is mortgaging the children's future.

What I would like to see is a little more of what we have heard from this side: efficient government, a government that lives within its means, a government that realises that most of the jobs and enterprise out there will be created by small businesses in the private sector—letting them off the leash, instead of trying, in some sort of Stalinist five-year plan, to create a job program that involves massive infrastructure spending to get fuelled in order to soak up jobs because you have strangled to death the private sector. If we could have a little bit more of that. You have done a very good job building my stadium—

Members interjecting:

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: —you have done a very good job fixing up the City of Adelaide in accordance with my plans. Now if you could just listen to that little pearl of wisdom I have offered—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: —then maybe you could balance the budget by the end of—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I can't hear the member for Waite.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: Thank you for your protection, Deputy Speaker. They have been ferocious in their interjections, and I'm glad that you have saved me from their withering wit and rapier-like commentary. Of course, apart from the bad, there has also been some ugly. I want to get onto the issue of electoral reform and the way in which politics is done.

I have mentioned that the campaign in Waite was mutually respectful on all sides. I am sad to say that in some electorates that was not the case; both sides, I think, were guilty of playing dirty. I think one side excelled a little more than the other, and others have mentioned that; I will not go over it.

Individual candidates and members, when they are running their campaign, will often be asked to do things by their party structures or campaign committees that will test their moral fibre. We all have to make the decisions that we feel comfortable with as candidates, and I would just ask some candidates to consider that going forward.

Yes, you could argue that it is only about winning, but when you look at the level of public cynicism about politics, the major parties and the way they work in general, you do have to ask yourself whether it is about more than winning; it is about the honourable way that you fight the fight, and it is about how you win as much as winning. I think we all need to reflect on that on all sides. It is not something that is exclusively the province of any particular party, but I would like to see a cleaner election in 2018.

Times have changed—the gentle times of the 1940s and 1950s have changed, and I think the modern media have largely precipitated that: the electronic media, the diversity of media, all wanting the scoop, all wanting to report, all wanting to get the edge, all wanting to be the first one to knock a minister down or criticise MPs, all wanting to be the first ones to construct a broken promise or get some headline out there. Of course, we politicians often have not helped ourselves either by fuelling the media; you cannot blame them for doing their job when we feed them up so amply with behaviours and actions that disappoint. I think we all could do better.

I am sure when the Ancient Greeks sat around and talked about democracy—and it is interesting watching communities around the world who are fighting for their freedom right now have the same arguments—they would have tested themselves with many questions. Someone once said to me that democracy is really about deciding how the money will be raised and how the money will be spent. Even now, in the eve of a federal election, we are seeing that definition unfold, about redistributing the money from those who have it to those who do not.

The trouble is it captures entire arguments about the extent to which you strangle the golden goose. If you rake too much away from those who have worked hard to earn it they will find ways to ensure that wealth leaves the country. On the other hand, if you are too fulsome in your generosity to those who have not earned it for one reason or another, then you undermine the incentive to work. It seems to me that when redistributing wealth, we should focus on those who do not have the physical, mental or emotional strength to manage without that help, but when one extends that welfare to those who could work but are not working, we have a problem.

I actually thing the Abbott government has been quite courageous in taking on some fundamental issues and questions at the moment publicly through the budget process that we will see unfold next week. If there is something that I would like to see from this government, it is a bit of courage in its first two or three budgets. I would really like to see this government balance the budget; they have said they would. It will involve some tough decisions: one of them will be that the government will have to stop spending—certainly, stop spending at the pace it has been spending. It will have to be smarter and wiser about how it spends, otherwise, as I said, we are doing nothing more than mortgaging the children's future.

That may involve embracing some new ideas. It may mean that the government needs to consider the sort of problems that other members have talked of in their addresses in reply with regard to the Public Service. We need an efficient, empowered Public Service, not necessarily a huge one. Would it not be better to have a leaner, better paid, better focused Public Service than a large, unwieldy one that is not delivering? You are going to need to find efficiencies within the machinery of government.

It is not just about job cuts; it is about the way the Public Service functions efficiently. Can I say, as a guide, one should not be doing as a government what the private sector can do better or as well. You are going to need to sort it out because, if you do not sort out the machinery of government, the cost of government, you will not balance the budget and we will all lose. Similarly, the commonwealth government is calling on the states to consider rationalising assets so that asset values captured up and held up in government ownership can be redeployed to build new roads, new water infrastructure, to build the things we need—schools and hospitals.

The Labor Party may have to move away from some of its ideologically based principles and start to be a little more pragmatic about what it does on behalf of the people we represent. I have previously said to the house that I am still trying to work out why we borrowed money on behalf of the taxpayers to build, for example, a desalination plant that actually has a revenue stream from the sale of water but then used a complex, convoluted and expensive public-private model to build a hospital which has no revenue stream. I am still trying to work that out. Why it was not the other way around still confuses me, and I think it demonstrates some muddy thinking from the government, muddy thinking that could be corrected with courage and with conviction.

I would say at the start of this four-year term that the people of South Australia expect all of us to start putting them first, not our political parties. I think this is true of all political parties in the parliament. At times, we seem to our constituents to be driven more by winning or by political pointscoring or by advancing the interests of our political party than by advancing their interests. We seem to be too focused on our own pet philosophical or ideologically driven points of order than we are on delivering them value for their hard-earned taxes paid. We need to start putting the people of South Australia first, and I can tell you my first priority is the people of Mitcham and the people of South Australia, well before party and self. I think we need to start thinking that way. We give lip service to it, but I do not think we always deliver on it.

These are difficult times for parliaments and for politicians, I must say. I think there is a level of cynicism out there. We can dispel that by doing better. We will never dispel it all, but one of the great fears I have about democracy in this country is that, if we are not careful, eventually cynicism will create such an environment that good people will not want to step forward and do the job. I think that would be a terrible turning point if our democracy is to thrive and prosper. The public need to be tolerant and forgiving, politicians are not perfect, but we similarly need to lift our game.

On electoral reform, it needs to be addressed. I am not a person who wanders around after the grand final complaining about the rules. I congratulate the government for its victory—you have 24, we have 23, I can count. We can grizzle about the rules forever, but at the end of the day we just have to make sure that at the next grand final we play a harder game on all parts of the paddock. I would say that a large number of people in South Australia have been cheated of the outcome they sought. Many thousands more wanted to see a Liberal government, and it is not we who have been let down, it is they. There is something wrong with a system that does not deliver government to the party that has won a majority of the popular vote.

In saying that, I am not convinced that redistributing boundaries dramatically is going to guarantee that outcome. I have considerable fears for those who think that you can somehow have spoke wheels out of the middle of Adelaide going out to the country, that somehow you can manipulate the boundaries in a way that will guarantee that a majority of votes will deliver government.

I am not sure that that is the answer at all; I think there will need to be smarter answers. But I would just say to the major parties: be careful what you wish for, because as you solve one problem you often create another. Minor parties and Independents will have points of view, and you may finish up with a far bigger mess than you have solved if you do not get that process of reform right and fair and balanced. I think it needs to be approached with great caution but with great determination.

I want to talk briefly about some portfolio issues and give some further guidance to the government on the off-chance that, like Adelaide Oval, they will pick it up. One of the things I want to talk about is trade and investment. This is an area that urgently needs attention. I think that the government has under-invested in ensuring that as many companies as possible in South Australia can sell their goods overseas. We need to spend more in this area. We have a new minister. I commend the work of the former minister. He did his best with a limited budget. We now have a new minister. I would say to the government that more needs to be injected into this space. Yes, we have a strategy to trade with China and India but we have seven trading regions.

The overwhelming majority of investment into Australian FDI comes from the United States or North America and Europe yet we have no strategy for those two regions. We need a strategy for North Asia, and we need a strategy for South East Asia. I note that the government said that they will try and deliver one by the end of the year. It should not have taken that long. We need seven strategies at least for our seven regions. We need better representation in each of those regions whether it is through Austrade or independently, and we need to create some programs to help get companies overseas selling their products around the table with other companies who want to buy those products.

This is an area that the government has neglected wilfully over recent years and I am encouraged by the government's change of focus, though, in recent years towards science, innovation, moving up the value chain, all of the points and directions being alluded to by Göran Roos whom the government has wisely engaged to assist them. I think the government is doing a better job of putting the spotlight on these areas now than was the case in 2002 through to about 2010, but we need to do more. We need to now invest in this area and get better results. When you take commodities out of our trade figures and the fact that our farmers have had a good year, you nub down to what small to medium enterprises are selling overseas, and we are not doing well enough. I would encourage the Treasurer during budget bilaterals and during the budget process to look at spending more in this area.

Can I also say that I am encouraged in the Governor's Address in Reply to see that the government is now starting to identify that we need a much closer relationship between the university sector and the centres of excellence in South Australia and business. The reality is that the Roxby Downs expansion did not proceed. The reality is that it is no longer competitive to produce automotive vehicles in this country. We have had those debates, and we are losing those pillars of our economy.

This is a great state. This is a state that could become a shining star in this national economy but it needs fundamental structural change. Unless the government starts to invest in helping us to sell our products overseas more earnestly, unless the government starts to invest in science, innovation and entrepreneurship, venture capital, getting these things moving more effectively, unlocking the potential business opportunities from our three major universities, from DSTO from the CSIRO, from the various CRCs that exist already, through attracting new CRCs, new plant functional genomic centres, new centres that may generate business ideas for small and medium enterprises to seize upon and grow—the more that we can invest in that area, the more we will succeed.

Göran Roos is on the money. I find it difficult to identify anything Göran Roos is telling us that is off-direction. It is on-direction. What is missing is the investment from government to make it happen.

I would like to see far more in this space. I think we need structures to get this creative sector talking better to business. There have been attempts, but we have not gone far enough. We need better costing, we need better funding of innovation and commercialisation, better assistance—we need to nurture entities like Bio Innovation SA and others so that they can grow. We need to encourage start-ups. We certainly need to get our universities up the global and national rankings.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: If I could excuse myself, honourable member, you may wish to seek leave or wind up.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: I will wind up, Madam Deputy Speaker, by simply saying that all the opportunities are before South Australia; we only need to seize them, and I would encourage the government to be more courageous in this next four years than it has been hitherto.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.R. Kenyon.

[Sitting suspended from 13:01 to 14:00]