<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2014-10-15" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2261" />
  <endPage num="2329" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Gawler Rail Line</name>
      <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000547">
        <heading>Gawler Rail Line</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4843" kind="question">
        <name>Mr WINGARD</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Mitchell</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-10-15">
            <name>Gawler Rail Line</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-10-15T14:36:07" />
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000548">
          <timeStamp time="2014-10-15T14:36:07" />
          <by role="member" id="4843">Mr WINGARD (Mitchell) (14:36):</by>  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?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Transport and Infrastructure</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister Assisting the Minister for Housing and Urban Development</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-10-15">
            <name>Gawler Rail Line</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-10-15T14:36:34" />
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000549">
          <timeStamp time="2014-10-15T14:36:34" />
          <by role="member" id="4842">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):</by>  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.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000550">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  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.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000551">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  I will listen carefully to what the Minister for Transport has to say.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <page num="2295" />
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000552">
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  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.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3124" kind="interjection">
        <name>Mr Pisoni</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000553">
          <by role="member" id="3124">Mr Pisoni:</by>  We wanted the feds to bail us out and they wouldn't do it.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000554">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  The member for Unley is warned.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000555">
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  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—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4840" kind="interjection">
        <name>Mr Tarzia</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000556">
          <by role="member" id="4840">Mr Tarzia:</by>  Work with them. Why do we have a state government?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000557">
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  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—</text>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000558">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="3124">Mr Pisoni interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000559">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  The member for Unley is warned for the second and final time.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000560">
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  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.</text>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000561">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—</text>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000562">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000563">
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  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.</text>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000564">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.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2014101505535caf91c24e5980000565">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  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.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>