Gawler Rail Line

Mr WINGARD (Mitchell) (14:36): My question is to the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure. Given the Auditor-General has identified that approximately $47 million of expenditure on the Gawler rail electrification project will be obsolete by the time the project is started again in 2017-18, will the minister confirm whether the total project cost is still $152 million, as budgeted?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning, Minister Assisting the Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:36): Can I thank the member for Mitchell for his question, and I also thank the deputy leader for finally allowing the member for Mitchell his purview in asking some questions about transport. Finally, we are not having a repeat of you taking up all his time in estimates by asking me questions about what the Deputy Premier is responsible for.

Ms CHAPMAN: Much as I love to be showered with gratitude from the minister, it is out of order to start interrupting his own speech to give us a lecture on this side.

The SPEAKER: I will listen carefully to what the Minister for Transport has to say.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: The deputy leader is right, Mr Speaker: it certainly is an infrequent showering. Can I say though that the Auditor-General's Report does make reference to the Gawler line modernisation project—a project which is particularly difficult to deliver in the context of having a federal government which is not interested in helping the states deliver public transport infrastructure across Australia. It's not just the Gawler modernisation project: it's projects in Victoria, projects in New South Wales and projects in Queensland. These are all projects which the commonwealth government has displayed absolutely no interest in partnering with the states on.

Mr Pisoni: We wanted the feds to bail us out and they wouldn't do it.

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley is warned.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: While I have been very glad to reach agreement with the commonwealth government to deliver substantial injections of funding for the Torrens to Torrens project—a project which the deputy leader announced that she would cancel if she was successful at the last state election—and also for the Darlington project, it's unfortunate that the federal government has no interest in partnering with the states—

Mr Tarzia: Work with them. Why do we have a state government?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: It's almost like you are not listening, member for Hartley. It's unfortunate that the federal government is no longer interested in partnering with any jurisdictions around the country on public transport infrastructure. So, with the pressing priorities that we have—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley is warned for the second and final time.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: So, while we have several public transport infrastructure projects we are wanting to deliver as quickly as possible, when we don't have any funding from a commonwealth partner, it means that we need to stage those projects in a manner which means that we can provide the greatest benefit to commuters as possible, hence the O-Bahn project commencing as quickly as possible and the delay that's necessitated for the delivery of the Gawler project.

When there is such a significant delay between the works that had already occurred, both in an operating and a capital sense, on the Gawler line modernisation project, and when we are able to recommence funding in the 2017-18 financial year, there is a necessary accounting review of how that expenditure—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: It's your question time. If you want to run it down, that's fine. I have no problem with that whatsoever. While there is a necessary review, given the delay over a number of years between the most recent expenditure on the project and when the project will recommence, yes, these assessments are made. Determinations are made about how much money (which has been spent) will be deemed either useful or obsolete, and those observations are being made in the project.

My advice from the department is that some of the works that have been incurred to date, not just in an operating sense—the scoping, the design, some of the early engineering works—but also some of the capital works—the installation of masts, some of the works to the line, also some of the drainage, the culvert works, all of those which have been put in place by capital expenditure to date—will be deemed useful and will contribute to the final delivery of the project. With that, I conclude my answer.

The SPEAKER: Before we go to the supplementary, if the minister is going to conduct himself as an agent provocateur, I am happy for the opposition to go the rats. The member for Mitchell, supplementary.