Address in Reply

Address in Reply

Debate resumed.

Mr DULUK (Davenport) (11:14): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you to the member for Bright for his kind words and the very colourful ending to his speech. I am proud to speak to this Address in Reply before the house today, as the new member for Davenport. First, I would like to acknowledge the support of my party and the trust placed in me to represent the people of Davenport; equally, I thank the electors for their support and the privilege they have afforded me. It is with an enormous sense of gratitude and responsibility that I take on the new role as their representative in Davenport and in South Australia.

Davenport is an active district with its members contributing through business, community involvement and neighbourly actions. The seat of Davenport covers the Mitcham Hills suburbs of Blackwood, Eden Hills, Bellevue Heights, Glenalta, Craigburn Farm, Bedford Park, parts of Darlington, Upper Sturt and Belair, Flagstaff Hill, Coromandel Valley and Hawthorndene. In addition, the electorate is home to many excellent primary schools, Blackwood High School, Flinders University and the Flinders Medical Centre. Significantly, open spaces such as the Belair National Park, Colebrook Reconciliation Park, Sturt Gorge and Wittunga Botanic Garden create the beautiful environment that provides the seat of Davenport a unique connection to bushland within suburban Adelaide.

We have a proud volunteer history in Davenport which gives it a strong community spirit. There are countless volunteer groups and volunteer hours performed in our area, from the CFS and SES, service clubs such as Lions, Rotary, RSL, Probus and Meals on Wheels, scouting, walking and wildlife groups, residents' associations, sporting and social clubs, church communities, school parent associations and families just to name a few. These groups add to the vitality of our community.

Many of the issues and concerns that are important to the families of Davenport are applicable to many South Australians. However, I would like to touch on a few local issues, including support for our local CFS and SES. The Sturt CFS group, which includes the brigades of Belair, Blackwood, Eden Hills, Coromandel Valley and Cherry Gardens is, in many ways, the embodiment of community and volunteering within the Mitcham Hills. Without the volunteer service of the local CFS over many decades, we would not have the strong and generous community that we have today. We owe a debt of gratitude to our CFS volunteers. It is incumbent on us to ensure that the CFS and SES are always well funded, respected and supported. The CFS and SES act as the fire service for a large part of the electorate. They are at every car accident and emergency incident, day or night.

The Blackwood Christmas Pageant includes the CFS appliances at the end of the parade just before Father Christmas arrives. We rely on our volunteer services throughout the year and especially in the bushfire season, as we have seen recently. As the member for Davenport, I honour their commitment to protecting our community and, as one CFS member said to me last week in my office, 'Sam, you just can't mess with the CFS.'

Honourable members: Hear, hear!

Mr DULUK: Road infrastructure, public transport and a dedicated transport master plan for the Mitcham Hills have long been on the agenda for local residents, councils and politicians. I am absolutely delighted that in the recent by-election my party announced the development of a master plan for the upgrading of the central road corridor through the Mitcham Hills: a plan to deliver improved bushfire safety for residents and reduce the peak hour bottlenecks that frustrate the daily commute on Old Belair Road, Main Road, Flagstaff Road and many other local road corridors. For too long master plans for the Mitcham Hills have been discussed with no funding attached. A future Marshall Liberal government has committed $20 million to fund both the master plan and the first stage of the Mitcham Hills road corridor upgrade.

Open spaces, bushland and national parks form a significant part of the electorate of Davenport. The Mitcham Hills are renowned for some of the last large remnant areas of Eucalyptus microcarpa, otherwise known as the grey box woodland gum tree, particularly within the Sturt Gorge Recreation Park. The Belair National Park attracts over 250,000 visitors each year. The park sits within the Mount Lofty Ranges which is regarded as one of Australia's 15 biodiversity hotspots.

The Wittunga Botanic Garden is one of the three botanic gardens in Adelaide and home to a large collection of South African ericas and proteas. Wittunga holds a special place in the heart of many residents. It would be wonderful to see this garden used to its full potential, just as it was last Friday, as part of the Wittunga Under the Stars. One of the drawbacks to its being fully utilised, in my mind, is the number of its regulations. Some of the regulations for this suburban botanical garden include: no bicycles, no skateboarding or rollerblading, no barbecues, no ball or throwing games. Does this mean 'no fun'? I am sure we can do better to ensure full use of our parks and gardens. The natural environment plays such an important part in our life. It is incumbent on us to generate its protection but also its utilisation for the benefit and education of all.

The seat of Davenport is named after Sir Samuel Davenport, one of South Australia's early colonial settlers and prominent landowners, and a member of the Legislative Council. He was a strong promoter of agriculture and new industries in the early colony, a strong advocate for the manufacture of olive oil, silk and tobacco, as well as a trustee of the Savings Bank, a director of several companies and, for 20 years, president of the Chamber of Manufactures.

I stand here as only the fifth member for Davenport. The previous members representing this seat can all boast significant achievements of service to this house and to this parliament, and I pay tribute to them. Joyce Steele, whose portrait hangs opposite me in this house, was the first female elected to the House of Assembly, and she served as a cabinet minister in the Hall Liberal government. Dean Brown, first elected as the member for Davenport at the age 30 and then, on his return to the house, as the member for Finniss, served as premier of this state from 1993 to 1996.

Stan Evans holds the record for the longest-serving whip in this parliament and the second longest-serving whip in the commonwealth—21 years. It was also Stan Evans who first put forward the motion proposing the establishment of the Ombudsman in South Australia. Recently retired, Iain Evans was the member for Davenport for the last 21 years. In my opinion, and in the opinion of many of his former constituents, Iain was a hardworking, dedicated and community-focused MP. Iain served as a minister in the Olsen and Kerin governments, and he had many notable achievements in his portfolios, especially his environment portfolio. Iain was also a former leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party. He leaves big shoes to fill, and he will be missed by many in Davenport.

I would like to personally put on the record my thanks to both Iain and Stan for their combined 29 years of service to the people of Davenport. I am grateful to both Stan and Iain and their families for their support, advice and belief in me on the path that has brought me here today. That journey began with my migrant grandparents. Three of them, having fled the horrors of war-torn Poland, arrived in Australia in 1949, and one of them arrived in 1957, a year that saw a change in the then Polish communist regime's attitude to certain forms of migration.

My grandparents' story is no different from that of the tens of thousands of postwar migrants who called Australia their new home. They, like our new Governor, came to this country with a suitcase filled with dreams for a better life. With limited English skills, they worked hard for themselves or in low-paid, unskilled jobs. They valued education and ensured that their children and grandchildren had the educational opportunities that were denied to them. It is a testament to my grandparents and the importance that they placed on education that all of their children and grandchildren have been tertiary educated.

My grandparents were hardworking, self-reliant, community-minded individuals. They had a strong faith in God, loved their adopted Australia but never forgot their native Poland. My grandparents' proudest day in the country was when they became naturalised citizens. In so many ways, they represented the best of our multicultural society.

I often draw strength from my grandmas (or babcias, as we would say in Polish) and reflect on what my babcias would say of the by-election result if they were alive today: one would say, 'Why didn't you win by more?', and the other would say, 'Be humble in your vocation.' For me, the enduring legacy of my babcias is one of self-sacrifice, as well as knowing that we must always work hard to achieve our goals whilst ensuring that we are humble in our success, remembering that the role of a parliamentarian is one of service.

There is no doubt that my calling for this parliamentary vocation stems from observing my grandparents' involvement in community and politics. My grandparents were founding members, office-bearers and active members of almost every Polish community group in South Australia. I have been active in the Polish community as well. Politically, Babcia Duluk was an active member of the captive nations campaign in the 1980s. I recall many conversations about Lech Walesa and the Solidarity movement around the kitchen table. These conversations absolutely fascinated me. In his 1949 election campaign speech, Sir Robert Menzies, founder of the modern Liberal Party, said of freedom and liberty:

To worship, to think, to speak, to be ambitious, to be independent, to be industrious, to acquire skill, to seek reward. These are the real freedoms, for these are the essence and nature of man.

It was these values of freedom that my grandparents passionately believed in, and they are the same values that I seek to uphold and drive my desire to make a contribution to this state.

As I have previously put on the record, community and volunteering play a major role in the lives of the people of Davenport. They have also played a large part in my life. For many years, I was a St John Ambulance cadet, including being SA Cadet Leader of the Year. For quite a while, I thought I wanted to be a paramedic after completing high school. I then realised that you probably need to have the stomach to handle the trauma that our front-line healthcare professionals face. I finally chose accounting and commerce instead.

St John Ambulance Australia each year delivers 1.2 million hours of voluntary community service, trains 500,000 people and treats 100,000 people in Australia at public events. As an organisation, I have always had a lot of respect for St John Ambulance and feel that my involvement with the organisation, whilst many years ago, played a part in my journey to this place.

I have been an active member of the Adelaide University Football Club for many years. It has been said that I am possibly not the best player to ever have run out onto the field, but I have been a long-time team manager of our team's D grade. The Adelaide University Football Club is one of those great clubs that embodies the virtues of suburban sport in Australia: volunteering, community focused, friendship, and gentle larrikin behaviour. It is not always about winning; it is about being part of a team.

In recent years, two other groups which I have been involved in are Neighbourhood Watch and Lions International. Can I acknowledge and thank members from both clubs for being in the gallery today. Both Lions and Neighbourhood Watch are fundamentally grassroots service organisations. The loyalty and dedication of the members of these groups cannot be underestimated. It is a great pity that in today's society we are beginning to see a generation gap in volunteering and community involvement. We must continue to nurture, promote and support our volunteer organisations, whose contributions add so much to the fabric of our communities.

My professional life has been spent in the accounting and finance industry. I completed my Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Adelaide and I am a CPA member. While studying at university, I was employed part time as an accountant for Pitcher Partners, where I was fully employed at the conclusion of my degree. From my first day of employment to my last day working in the commercial and small-business banking arm of the ANZ, I have been a dedicated supporter of small to medium South Australian businesses. I come to this house with an understanding of the complexities of small business and will seek to champion their cause at every opportunity.

Small business forms the backbone of our South Australian economy. Davenport is a community home to many small businesses and business owners, from fish and chip and newsagent operators, local hairdressers and barbers (and it is a shame that I no longer have a need for their services), franchise owners and self-employed tradies, fruit and veg wholesalers to apple and pear growers. In fact, the typical Davenport business operator works 7 days a week, has his or her home as collateral for their business finance, ensures that their employees are well looked after and remunerated, and finally, at the end of the week, takes home for themselves a wage to look after their family, pay the mortgage and put a bit away for a rainy day. In many ways, the Davenport small business operator is the embodiment of Liberal Party ideals.

A high priority for small business operators in Davenport, and indeed all over the state, is business taxation reform. State taxation reform is well and truly overdue if we are going to create an environment where our business operators can grow and prosper into the future. With small business being one of the largest employers of South Australians, it is imperative that government does not put a handbrake on economic growth.

People are responsible for their own destiny, and decentralised decision-making powers within the framework of government help facilitate this. Like many on this side of the house, I am a committed federalist. Strong cooperative federalism within our commonwealth requires that states be visionary and experimental in policy formulation. It allows policies to be tailored to individual and regional community needs. Cooperative federalism fosters greater study of government decisions and promotes competition between states and territories to provide incentives to improve government efficiency. Canberra does not always know best.

Over the past decades, we have seen the states cede power to Canberra at the expense of the benefits and virtues that cooperative federalism brings to the table. A review of the roles and responsibilities of the states and the commonwealth in areas such as health, education, law enforcement, transport, electoral reform and fairness, and industrial relations is the logical first step in enhancing the workings of our federation.

One of the many challenges that faces our state is the need to reform our taxation base. Our state taxation regime is inefficient, penalises job creativity and transactions between individuals and corporate entities. A poorly designed state taxation system undermines our sustainable future within the federation. For example, payroll tax and land tax have narrow bases and high rates of tax and are a disincentive to economic transactional activity.

A comprehensive review of our state's taxation also needs to look at the possibility of transferring some of the commonwealth's taxing powers to the states to address our current vertical fiscal imbalance—the difference between expenditure responsibilities and revenue-raising powers. State governments have become captive to an inefficient taxation regime, a regime that can only be improved by embracing cooperative federalism.

I may be accused of being an economic conservative, but a conservative is someone who conserves that which is tried, tested and true and reforms that which is broken or harmful. In the footsteps of Sir Samuel Davenport, I want to spend my time in this house as a champion for industry, agriculture, new technologies and IT. South Australia must look to its natural advantages for its future prosperity—agriculture, education, tourism and renewable energies. We must provide the right regulatory taxation and incentive framework to achieve this.

It is economic growth that provides us with the dividend that ensures that our social capital can be built. We cannot maintain world-class health and education facilities, support the disadvantaged and the marginalised, protect the environment and promote the arts if we do not have a strong economy providing an economic dividend. It is economic prosperity that drives social cohesion and social progress.

It is paramount that young people stay engaged and active within the political process. We have all read the reports and seen the studies on the lack of current engagement by young Australians in the political process. The Australian Electoral Commission estimates that 300,000 eligible young Australians between the ages of 18 and 25 are not enrolled to vote. A 2013 Lowy Institute poll suggested that only 48 per cent of 18 to 29 year olds prefer democracy to any other kind of government.

These statistics and trends are a worry if we are to maintain our democracy. Democracy as we know it is losing traction in our society. It is important that the teaching of civics in our schools, public debate and political leadership are placed as a priority to engage young Australians. Young people vote with their feet when they are not engaged. Clearly, we can and must do better. We must ensure that all citizens of this state and country trust our institutions and believe in our democracy.

Higher education and the export of education services is now a billion-dollar industry for South Australia. Ensuring that our education institutions remain world class should always be a priority for any government. World-class education for all South Australians is paramount if we are to grow and prosper. Just as my grandparents saw the value of education in my family, so must we ensure that all South Australians receive and see the benefit in education. Education is the key that lifts individuals out of poverty, empowers the marginalised and underpins tomorrow's success stories.

Education is also about choice. Too often, young people enrol in university because it is seen as the right path. We must ensure that our vocational educational institutions are respected as much as our universities. Our graduates from a well-resourced VET system will play crucial roles in our state's natural advantage industries.

I am a proud graduate of our state school system, and I am a strong advocate for public education. That is why I am concerned about our current state school system. Our NAPLAN results highlight the long-term decline in our education standards. Too many children are not reaching benchmarks in literacy and numeracy, leaving them vulnerable to disengagement in education in high-school years.

It is of great concern to me that too many of our teaching graduates are on 12-month employment contracts for years after their graduation. In fact, South Australia has over 3,000 teaching staff on contracts of 12 months or less. It makes little sense in having our teachers complete a master's in education if they cannot obtain permanency in our education system. Our current system is allowing our best young teachers to walk away from this important vocation.

Sadly, it is not only the vocation of teaching that young people are walking away from. They are walking away from the state of South Australia itself enticed by the perception of improved career prospects and a more vibrant cosmopolitan lifestyle interstate or overseas. South Australia is losing thousands of residents annually, the highest proportion being the 25 to 29 age group, to the Eastern States—a brain drain which costs our economy millions in lost tax revenue and human capital. We must do more to create a culture of fearless innovation to attract young people to and retain them in South Australia so that South Australia is a place of destination not departure.

The hallmark of a just and caring society is measured by how it treats its most disenfranchised and disadvantaged. As we sit in this house, we need to reflect on how our legislation impacts on those less fortunate than us. Assisting those who suffer from mental illness, supporting the disability sector and ensuring that up-to-date, accessible and well-funded palliative care services are available will always be priorities of mine.

We must do more to allow those with disabilities to actively participate in the workplace. A 2013 ABS report found that participation in the workforce by people with disabilities has fallen over the past 20 years. The 2011 study by Deloitte Access Economics found that closing the gap in labour market participation between people with a disability and those without a disability by one-third would add $43 billion to the nation's GDP over the next decade.

It is vital to ensure that people with disabilities are able to access the financial and social benefits that come with employment. Improving employment outcomes for people with disabilities has the potential to provide for and enhance quality of life and independence. Barriers to workplace participation—especially through red tape, misinformation and employee concerns—can be reversed through positive government action and community engagement.

I was raised in a musically-rich environment and I have a strong appreciation for the arts. The value of the arts needs to be recognised not only for the intrinsic value of both enhancing and enriching our emotional lives but also for their far-reaching effects on the economy, health and wellbeing and education. The arts are crucial and need further development in our early childhood curriculum.

Early childhood professionals have long recognised not only the significant benefits to creative development but also the connection between participation in musical activities and educational success in literacy, maths and languages. In order to be the clever state, we need to invest in the creative development of our children and young people. The chair of the UK arts council, Sir Peter Bazalgette, recently wrote:

Imagine society without the civilising influence of the arts and you'll have to strip out what is most pleasurable in life and much that is educationally vital. Take the collective memory from our museums; remove the bands from our schools and choirs from our communities; lose the empathetic plays and dance from our theatres or the books from our libraries; expunge our festivals, literature and painting, and you are left with a society bereft of a national conversation about its identity, or anything else.

There is a saying that great cities have great orchestras. Our own Adelaide Symphony Orchestra is a great orchestra, but one without a home. It is time we had a dedicated performing arts centre for our orchestra—like the Barbican Centre in London or the Avery Fisher Hall in New York—with all the associated economic flow-on benefits in creating a vibrant cultural space. With Adelaide being the only Australian capital city without a dedicated concert hall, can we truly claim to be the Festival State?

To champion education, disabilities and the arts is not simply the purview of those opposite. As Liberals, it is incumbent upon us to champion these issues, as it is through education that the individual develops, it is through empowering those with disabilities that individuals gain empowerment, and it is through art and culture that the individual's humanity is enhanced.

I come to this house ready to serve and to champion many causes; however, in the words of Martin Luther King Jr:

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.

It is only when we take the words of Martin Luther King Jr and apply them directly to our daily lives in this place that we will truly be able to progress and reform this state for our future prosperity.

I would like to put on the record my appreciation and gratitude to the South Australian Young Liberal Movement. I joined the Young Liberals when I was at university, and I am fortunate enough to be a former president and life member. The movement is a great training ground in the battle of ideas and policy formulation. It must also be a record that, including myself, four former Young Liberal presidents now serve in this current parliament: the Hon. Michelle Lensink in the other place, the member for Morialta, John Gardner, and my good friend the member for Schubert, Stephan Knoll. I look forward to continuing the battle of ideas with the member for Schubert, and thank him for his friendship, support and haphazard wine advice.

I would also like to thank former Young Liberal presidents Chris Browne, Dan Cregan and, in particular, Michael van Dissel for their support, loyalty and wise counsel over many years. I would like to acknowledge and thank the leader and the parliamentary Liberal Party for their hard work and assistance over the by-election campaign, especially on those hot January days.

Thank you for the support of the local Davenport Liberal Party and the wider Liberal family, who volunteered their time for my campaign. Manning phones, doorknocking, supermarket visits, letterboxing and polling day rosters all need volunteers. There are so many people who supported my campaign to win the seat of Davenport, and I am sure I will probably forget a few people; however, I would like to particularly thank Pam Lehmann, Ray and Pam Scottney-Turbill, Louise Flood, Jenny Coates, Geoff and Liz Bartlett, David Hawker, George and Pat Oram, Barry and Maria Caddle, Wayne Jobson, David Henderson (the master carpenter), Steve Murray, Heidi Girolamo, Helen Ronson, Travis Munckton, Alex Hyde, Brendan Clark and Marg Westmore for all their hard work, dedication and commitment to the campaign.

I thank all those who have been able to come along to the gallery today; it is wonderful to see so many of you here. I would like to place on the record that coming to this house as an elected member is no solo effort. I have received wonderful support from so many people over many years, and I would like to particularly acknowledge Joan and Steele Hall, Bin Irwin, the Hon. Terry Stephens, Hugh Martin, George and Helen Sobol, Brian Moran and the Bode Shed for their guidance, sharing of past experiences and belief in me. I owe you all a great debt of gratitude.

To my family and friends, thank you. To Gemma, thank you for your love and understanding. To mum and dad and my three siblings, there is no doubt that our family dinners have provided an invaluable training ground for the argy-bargy of politics. To the people of Davenport, thank you for the honour of allowing me to serve you in this place.

Finally, as a member of the Aberfoyle & Districts Lions Club, I would like to end my Address in Reply with the Lions Code of Ethics—a code that I like to think we can all live by, and a standard to which we should all aspire to. I thank the club for allowing me to read the code:

Lions Code of Ethics

To Show my faith in the worthiness of my vocation by industrious application to the end that I may merit a reputation for quality of service.

To Seek success and to demand all fair remuneration or profit as my just due, but to accept no profit or success at the price of my own self-respect lost because of unfair advantage taken or because of questionable acts on my part.

To Remember that in building up my business it is not necessary to tear down another's; to be loyal to my clients or customers and true to myself.

Whenever a doubt arises as to the right or ethics of my position or action towards others, to resolve such doubt against myself.

To Hold friendship as an end and not a means. To hold that true friendship exists not on account of the service performed by one to another, but that true friendship demands nothing but accepts service in the spirit in which it is given.

Always to bear in mind my obligations as a citizen to my nation, my state, and my community, and to give them my unswerving loyalty in word, act, and deed. To give them freely of my time, labour and means.

To Aid others by giving my sympathy to those in distress, my aid to the weak, and my substance to the needy.

To Be Careful with my criticism and liberal with my praise; to build up and not destroy.

I thank the house.

Honourable members: Hear, hear!

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (11:47): Parliament is the cornerstone of our democracy, and so the opening day of the new session of the 53^rd parliament is a tradition we should all value—a show of the importance this institution has in our society. I acknowledge we meet on the Kaurna lands and thank Uncle Lewis O'Brien for his welcome to country on opening day.

I thank also our new Governor for delivering his first address with such natural sincerity, and acknowledge he and his wife for their continuing service to South Australia now in their new role as the vice-regal couple. I welcome the new MPs for Fisher and Davenport as they take their places for the first time. South Australia faces its share of challenges in the changing world, and there are a few matters in the Governor's address, among the many exciting initiatives it contained which raise the bar on the contest of ideas, that are of particular interest to the electorate.

Firstly, I welcome the significant agenda in reforming planning, transport and infrastructure legislation that has been foreshadowed. Of course, this comes off the back of the lengthy consultation process undertaken by the Expert Panel on Planning Reform. I note the government's continuing dedication to the task of urban renewal and look forward to seeing the benefits.

The Modbury regional centre forms the heart of the Florey electorate and of the wider north-eastern suburbs. It is a major centre in urban Adelaide which has significant potential to enjoy improvements, resulting in reforms to the law which will make planning processes more effective. The exciting public transport improvements and the O-Bahn tunnel in the CBD are important to Modbury. As part of the O-Bahn's corridor, Modbury is nominated as one of the major sites for transit oriented development in the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide and, with the right investment signals to the private sector, community support and upgrades to transport, has the potential to be a major growth centre in years to come. I believe the local council will join with me in enthusiastically pursuing a new vision for the Modbury of the future.

The government's Urban Renewal Act, passed in 2013, seems tailor-made for revitalising Modbury and I will be urging councils and the government to look at ways this could be used to provide the investment signals the private sector needs, and to instil the confidence in the process that the community demands. I believe a new planning system could create the reset needed to revive the Modbury urban renewal agenda and I look forward to working with major landowners, the community and potential investors to bring viable propositions forward for consultation and then onto council and state government for approval.

Transforming Health will bring better health outcomes and further investment at the Modbury Hospital, increasing rehabilitation and recovery facilities. This can, in time, be a major local employment generator. It will become a major boost for this important medical facility and provide a strong basis for the Modbury Hospital in future years.

I have spent my entire public life advocating for the Modbury Hospital. Despite all the rumours, and they are just that, it remains a strong link in the provision of health services in this state, and while I am around, and beyond, always will. It is a shame the opposition, instead of supporting the Modbury Hospital and the essential reform initiatives proposed by Transforming Health, is intent on opposition for opposition's sake and continues to spread misinformation. The emergency department at Modbury is not closing and I challenge the opposition to be truthful about this—it is not closing. Rather than fearmongering on this issue, they would be wise to get behind—

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The leader will not interject out of his seat.

Ms BEDFORD: Thank you, sir—the health initiatives that will truly transform health delivery in this state. The emergency department at Modbury is not closing. One thing we will not do, as a Labor government, is try to make patients pay extra for health care. We are trying to make the health system work even better for everybody, every time.

The future of the submarine and ship building industries, and all manufacturing, remains pivotal to this state's future. I think enough has been said on that matter to underline how important it truly is for employment for everyone in the suburbs that we all represent in the north and north-eastern suburbs, and beyond.

I note the government has committed to a review of legislation and regulation to identify remaining areas of discrimination in South Australia. Members will know I have a strong interest in equality issues and I was glad that, with the strong support of other members, I was able to get some of the first law reforms for same-sex couples through this parliament some years ago in a private members' bill. But more needs to be done.

We need to revisit the issues of exemptions in equal opportunity laws that are outdated and unaccountable. We need to allow same-sex couples to certificate or register their relationships, such as through civil unions, at least until the federal parliament acts to finally make marriage available to all on an equal basis. I commend this initiative and I am sure the South Australian Law Reform Institute will have regard to these and other issues as it undertakes this investigation.

I also mention the Transforming Criminal Justice strategic overview and my continuing interest in juvenile justice, prison reform and appropriate measures to see changes to spent conviction laws. Family violence remains an issue of grave concern, now highlighted by the championing of Australian of the Year, Rosie Batty. I hope to be able to help in a small way by introducing discussion on a paper prepared by a university intern looking at a program to assist in caring for companion animals owned by those caught up in family violence, which I hope will mean families can leave dangerous situations before circumstances escalate.

Educational opportunities will remain ever more important as our young people learn to live with the fast pace of changes in technology, changes which some of us take a little longer than others to absorb. With three grandchildren, my interest, awareness and concern remain as strong as when I first became involved in public activism as a kindy mum.

In closing, I return to my initial thoughts on the traditions and history of democracy To this end, I urge all MPs to keep bringing their school and community groups here to watch parliament at work on sitting days or to see the building more thoroughly when we are not in session so as to nurture the notion of the value of the vote and how even one vote can change the course of events, and that democracy happens every day in a participatory democracy such as ours, not just on election day when the pencil, rather than the gun, can change leadership and policy direction. I commend the address to the house.

Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (11:54): It is my pleasure to rise today to speak on the Address in Reply. It was a great honour to have His Excellency the Hon. Hieu  Van Le come to our parliament. As I previously laid on the record, this side of the house was delighted with his most worthy of appointments to this high office. We also lay on the record our appreciation for the work that his equally hard-working wife, Mrs Lan Le, does for the people of South Australia.

The Governor's speech, of course, laid out the Labor government's agenda for the Second Session of the Fifty-Third Parliament. Whilst it is always wonderful to have His Excellency here in the parliament, on this particular occasion it was nothing more than a personal indulgence by the Premier. It is his third such indulgence since he has become Premier of this state. Of the three 'visions' that he has created, this was by far the most disappointing. I say this because it provided no continuity with the previous two indulgences that he has put this parliament through.

I took the time this morning to read through the first of these visions that the Premier created: when the government at the time opened the Second Session of the Fifty-Second Parliament in February 2012. I think politicians should be judged on what they deliver, so I thought I would go back three years and refresh my memory as to what the Premier said he would deliver for the people of South Australia. He said that we were going to have these seven primary areas of focus for action, so it was with much hilarity that I read about some of these areas of focus. I do not have time this morning to focus on all of these areas, but I will pick out a couple that I think need to be dealt with.

The first is the establishment of a futures fund. I just point out to this house that since the Premier first floated this idea in February 2012, not one single solitary cent has been deposited into the futures fund here in South Australia. In fact, this lazy government has not even got around to putting the enabling legislation into place to establish the fund. So, we do not have a fund, we do not have any money to put into the fund, but that was one of the first items that this Premier raised in his vision for South Australia more than three years ago.

The second item he dealt with was the growing importance of advanced manufacturing here in South Australia, and I commend the Premier for that because this is a very important area. But again, let's not just talk about dreams and distractions, let's talk about deliverables. Where has this government been in terms of delivering for the advanced manufacturing sector in South Australia? It has been nowhere. We have fewer people employed in this area than we had when the government first made its pronouncement that advanced manufacturing would be so critically important to our future. But the government did do something: it established—are you ready for this?—the ministerial Advanced Manufacturing Council. This is a ministerial council.

The member for Playford, who is in the house at the moment diligently listening to my Address in Reply speech, was on this Advanced Manufacturing Council. I would love to hear what the ministerial Advanced Manufacturing Council has achieved in the three years from whence it was established, because I have never heard anything from this ministerial advisory council—nothing. In fact, not even all of the original members are in this house. But not content with establishing a ministerial advisory council, the government established its own Advanced Manufacturing Council, with legislation that we supported and passed through the house with alacrity. Again, what has this council done? What lobbying has this council done to advance the cause of the advanced manufacturing sector in South Australia? Not much.

When I turn to page 114 of this year's Budget Paper 4 and look at Program 12: Manufacturing Innovation in the Department of State Development, do I see a massive increase in the amount of money that the government is now spending on advanced manufacturing in South Australia? No, I do not. In fact, last year we spent $22½ million supporting manufacturing and innovation in South Australia. Is it $25 million this year or $30 million, because let us not forget this is one of the principal focuses of this government? No, we are spending less. We are actually spending $18 million this year—$22½ million last year and $18 million this year. See, we are going backwards.

There is a lot of spin in what this government has to say. This government is big on dreams and big on distractions, but not big on deliverables for the people of South Australia. In fact, if we look at the current situation in South Australia, there is no wonder that the government wants to talk about driverless cars. There is no doubt that the government wants to talk about banning cars driving into the CBD. I will tell you that it was pretty difficult to get into the CBD this morning. I think that they are already on phase 1 of their carless CBD this morning.

There is no doubt that the government wants to talk about distractions. Take a look at the statistics. The circumstances which we find ourselves in are frightening at the moment—7.3 per cent unemployment in South Australia. This is the highest rate in the nation. People say, 'Oh, that is the seasonal figure.' We will take the trend figure; that is also the highest rate in the nation.

Net interstate migration continues to spiral out of control. Net interstate migration was 3,000 people last year. That is the difference between the people who are leaving the state versus those who are coming back into the state—3,000 people. It is 38,000 people who appear in our net interstate migration figures in this state since this government came to power. We would be transformed as a state if those people were back here at the moment.

And, of course, our debt continues to rise out of control under this government—more than $13 billion. We will have a state debt of more than $13 billion by the 2016-17 year. And what are the consequences of that poor economic mismanagement? I will give you one statistic and this is a statistic that the former leader, the member for Heysen, always spoke about. She spoke about it because it was so critically important and that is the interest rate that we have to pay on Labor's economic mismanagement. Let me tell you that by the 2016-17 financial year we will be borrowing $725 million per year to pay the interest on the debt that Labor has run up. Imagine what you could do in this state with $725 million per year.

The member for Florey would not have to worry about services being cut at Modbury Hospital because there would be plenty of money in the budget to stop the cuts of this government at Modbury Hospital, like the closure of paediatric services and cuts to the emergency department. In fact, the member for Florey could be advocating on behalf of her constituents to the government to increase and enhance the services at Modbury Hospital.

Instead, she has to go to the people of South Australia and say, 'The Transforming Health report might be a whole pile of cuts to the people of Florey, but do not worry, it is all good. The Transforming Health report is all good for the people of Florey.' It is no good for the people of Florey; it is no good for the people of South Australia, but it is a consequence of 12½—nearly 13—years of gross economic mismanagement in South Australia.

Let us take a look at what was good in the Governor's speech outlining the government's agenda for this next session of the parliament. I particularly liked all of the Liberal policies which the government has put into place and plenty of those have been included. One of the first issues that they talked about was an inquiry into the opportunities of the nuclear industry in South Australia.

This is something that those on this side of the house have been talking about for years. In fact, I spoke about it publicly twice in the lead-up to the election, saying that we needed to have a government-led inquiry into the opportunities of the nuclear industry for South Australia, and I said that this should be done in a bipartisan way from government. At the time when I made these public comments, the Premier of South Australia rejected that. He said there was no opportunity for South Australia. In fact, he described my comments as 'a dangerous distraction' and now he has adopted the Liberal Party's position, and we thank him for that.

He has also talked about the long overdue need to increase event funding and the bid fund in South Australia. We have been left without a substantial bid fund to bring events into South Australia for an extended period of time. Do not forget Labor closed down the Liberal initiative, the very successful Liberal initiative, of Australian Major Events which bid for, and won, fantastic events here in South Australia—events like the Tour Down Under, events like the Clipsal—events which this government stands up and talks about how successful they have been over an extended period of time.

They never talk about their events. They never tell us about the KI Surf Classic. That has gone completely off the agenda. They do not go into that one in too much detail whatsoever, but they do talk about the wonderful events that were established under the Liberal government through that excellent mechanism of Australian Major Events which had a proper bid fund. So we do welcome the fact that this government is now going full circle and putting a proper bid fund back in place, like was in place when the Liberal Party was in power in South Australia.

Of course we support their initiative for the South-East Asia Engagement Strategy. Why? Because that is our policy. It has been our policy for an extended period of time. This government has ignored the opportunities in South-East Asia for a very long period and that has been to the detriment of our exporters in South Australia. Of course they should be doing that. They should have been doing it for many years.

In relation to the taxation review, I have talked about few things as many times as the need for tax reform in South Australia, and it is great that the government is finally going to get around to do that, but we are absolutely worried about their proposal to put an annual land tax on the family home here in South Australia. This government only wants to talk about shifting the deck chairs. They have missed the fundamental point and that fundamental point is that we want tax relief in South Australia. So whilst we will be supporting whatever proposal they have for engaging in a debate on tax reform in South Australia, our starting position will always be to reduce that burden on the productive component of the economy, not just shifting the deck chairs, and certainly not putting an annual land tax on the family home in South Australia.

Of course one of the other great Liberal initiatives that is taken up in the Governor's speech is the reform of the Department for Education and Child Development. Now if there is ever a department which needs fundamental root and branch reform it is the education department, and I know that the member for Unley, who has been the shadow minister in this area for—

Mr Pisoni: Six years.

Mr MARSHALL: —six years—and seen off, how many?

Mr Pisoni: Four.

Mr MARSHALL: Four separate ministers in this area—knows all too well that we must have decentralisation of this department. We must have a greater focus on autonomy in our schools and we must remove child protection from the education department. We need to go back to a situation where our education department in South Australia is focused on educating our children, not on child protection. That should be its own separate stand-alone agency with its own dedicated cabinet minister, and that is what should happen in this area, and we look forward to working with the government on that area.

So you see there were some good initiatives in the Governor's speech and, of course, they were all great Liberal initiatives. I do want to also speak about what the government should be doing. Often we get accused, and in fact I was accused just a few moments ago of being somebody who only talks about being in opposition. I think the member for Florey said, 'So often the opposition just wants to be the opposition for opposition's sake.' Well, what a load of rubbish. I have never heard so much rubbish. Again, the member for Florey was way off the mark with her comments in the parliament. I think she should take a good look at herself, quite frankly.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Maligning other members is a low form of criticism.

Mr MARSHALL: Was that an interjection now from the chair?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You'll suffer.

Mr MARSHALL: Usually when the Speaker speaks, we have to sit down. Were you making a—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I wasn't standing up, sir.

Mr MARSHALL: Okay, so I will outline, at the member for Florey's behest, what our agenda would be if we were in government, and what we would be doing to advance the cause of this state. First, we would be reducing taxation, we would not be talking about shifting the deck chairs; we would be talking about reducing the tax burden on our businesses, on our families, in South Australia. Why? Because we are the highest taxed state in Australia. It is not good enough, when we have the highest unemployment rate, to have the highest taxation rate in this state. We should be reducing that to stimulate economic activity. That would be the No.1 thing we would do.

It was the No.1 thing we talked about in the lead-up to the state election. We were the ones who said that we would block the car park tax. We were the ones who said we would reduce land tax. We were the ones who said we would reduce payroll tax. We were the ones who said that we would have no new taxes and levies. It is interesting that the government did not match us on that promise to create no new taxes and levies, because what did they do immediately after the election? They whacked a massive annual land tax on the family home by removing the remission on the emergency services levy. We have said that we will reinstate that remission, because we do not believe that the people, the families of South Australia, should be paying that additional tax burden to make up for the inefficiency of this wasteful government.

The second point is that we must not just trim red tape but must eliminate. We must start deregulating here in South Australia, and that would be our focus. We said, in the lead-up to the election, that we would establish the first state-based productivity commission, to do the important work of removing regulations and redundant legislation that encumber businesses and individuals in South Australia. The government has, in the small business sector, established a red tape reduction steering committee. It is great that they have created a steering committee, but when will they get on with the important work of pulling off that regulation from business in South Australia?

Are they or are they not serious about creating jobs in South Australia? Clearly, they are not, because they have not put a mechanism in place. You do not have bureaucrats deregulating; it needs to be a separate stand-alone agency, and that is why, in the lead-up to the election, that we said that the Essential Services Commission of South Australia should be morphed into the first state-based productivity commission. That is not a dream—that is a deliverable—something we would have delivered on, unlike this government that talks about dreams and distractions and not deliverables.

The third area on which we said we would focus was the establishment of a long-range productive infrastructure planning statutory authority, infrastructure SA: again, not a dream, not a distraction, but something that could have been delivered on. Why? Because we have very finite capital in this state, and we have not developed a good quality mechanism for determining which project gets that finite capital.

The decisions of this government are shrouded in secrecy. This government has a focus on delivering capital programs that are influenced by marginal seats and electoral cycles, rather than on the best outcomes for the taxpayers of South Australia. That is why we said that it needs to be done independently, so that we know that when we spend a cent of our finite capital it is focused on delivering the best outcomes and having the highest return for the people of South Australia. That would be a deliverable.

We said that we would back our exporters, and we must back our exporters. This government talks about China, this government talks about India and now this government is talking about its South-East Asian engagement strategy, but it is not talking about how much they have slashed the budget to support our exporters. If we go back to the 2011-12 year, this government spent—are you ready for it—$30 million supporting our exporters. So, is it now $40 million or $50 million? It is $18 million! We have gone backwards over the last three years in South Australia, because this government has no ability to focus on the things that are important for South Australia.

There are few ways to grow jobs in South Australia—few ways—but one of the most important and potent ways to grow jobs is to increase exports out of this state. Every time we sell goods and services interstate or overseas we are bringing somebody else's money into our state to grow the size of our economy, and that is why it is so important to support those firms that can do that. Well, we do not. We do not support our exporters in South Australia; in fact, we have slashed the budget, closed overseas offices and we are doing everything we can to get in the way of this important sector of our economy.

The fifth area that we would focus on, and this government should focus on, is the public sector. I must say, for those of you who maybe were not paying attention or were not in the chamber at the time, I commend the member for Bright's Address in Reply speech, which was a very eloquent, enlightening and insightful thesis on what is happening and what needs to happen in our public sector in South Australia.

I come from the private sector and probably three, four or maybe five decades ago the private sector determined that the biggest asset in any organisation is the people who work in that organisation. For some reason, the Premier of this state and this government seem to be operating in this time vacuum where they do not realise that to get the most out of their asset they have to listen to their asset and show it some respect.

Most recently, with the restructure in DPC, I heard some very disturbing and damaging renditions of what happened on the morning that 11 senior public servants were dismissed. It really was like these public servants had been caught with their hand in the till. Can you imagine senior members of the Public Service, with decades of service to the people of South Australia, being marched out of the building? It is absolutely shameful.

The government uses the excuse that this happens in the private sector. I have operated in the private sector my entire life prior to coming into this place and I have never seen such a disgraceful exhibition as was played out on that morning in the Premier's own department. He needs to take responsibility for that. That was outrageous. If we valued our Public Service, we could improve the productivity in our Public Service, and that is exactly what we need to do.

I spent some time with John Key in New Zealand last year when I was accompanied by the member for Flinders and we visited there to look at how they turned around the productivity of their public service. They did not have a slash and burn mentality in New Zealand but they did look for productivity improvements in what they referred to as a constrained fiscal environment. They did not have massive increases in public expenditure each year—they tried to keep it at a very low growth rate—but they actually worked with their public service to deliver improved outcomes for the people of New Zealand. Public servants are a wellspring of ideas and opportunities to improve productivity. They are being ignored and, worse than being ignored, they are being treated appallingly by this government, which is out of touch with the most important asset in this state.

Moreover, to improve the productivity of the Public Service in South Australia, we need a government that has a better understanding of the enabling power of information technology. To get better outcomes, we must have a much better use of IT in South Australia and this government is scared to death of IT and computers. Why is that? It is because nearly every single solitary project they have touched they have messed up.

Take a look at the EPAS system at the moment, take a look at the Oracle implementation in the health department and the RISTEC implementation in the Treasurer's own department. Every single time they touch an IT project, it is a mess. Where are we now? We have a government which is scared, not implementing best practice and we are getting further and further behind and our productivity is falling down.

Finally, in my seven-point plan, we need to develop a single-minded focus on reducing costs on business and on families to create jobs. We have the highest taxes in the nation, we have the highest electricity prices in the nation, we have the highest water prices in the nation and we have the highest WorkCover rate in the nation. Every one of these things is chipping away at our opportunity and job creation in South Australia.

That is why, this week, we will be moving to establish an independent inquiry into water prices in South Australia. This is absolutely necessary because in South Australia we have the highest water prices in the nation. Last year, we had two former commissioners and a former chief executive of ESCOSA coming out and saying that this government has essentially cooked the books. They have artificially inflated the regulated asset base of SA Water, which has a direct flow-on effect to our water prices in South Australia.

If this is true, the government is in real trouble, and the only way the government can remove this spectre that they have been essentially overcharging South Australians—businesses and consumers—for an extended period of time, the only way they can clear their name is to have an independent inquiry into water prices in South Australia. If they are not prepared to do that, then I think they stand guilty in front of the people of South Australia in the lead-up to the next election.

There were explosive claims that the regulated asset base of SA Water may be overvalued by $2 billion. The flow-on effect of that each year to water consumers is in the tens and tens of millions of dollars. Imagine if this were a private sector artificially passing on inflated prices in a regulated environment to households in South Australia: they would be prosecuted and directors would end up in gaol. The government, the Premier and the Treasurer need to clear their names, and the only way they can do this is by agreeing to the Liberal Party's proposal for an independent inquiry into water prices in South Australia.

There are just a couple of final things I would like to put on the record today. I thought it was most important, when His Excellency was opening this Second Session of the 53^rd Parliament, to acknowledge our CFS, our SES and our volunteer heroes who had supported our state in the recent Sampson Flat and Tantanoola fires. I would like to commend the Governor for those comments and echo those sentiments. The CFS, the SES, Red Cross, Lions—a range of volunteer groups across South Australia—acted extraordinarily when they were called upon to help with those fires.

I visited Tantanoola after the fire was put out and met with Michael Kemp, who is the Group Captain of the Wattle Range CFS. I know I am just pulling out one person, but I think this exemplifies the level of service: Michael Kemp joined the CFS in 1971. I joined the St James kindergarten in 1971 and he joined the CFS. He was made Group Captain of the Wattle Range CFS in 1976 and has served without a break since 1976 completely and utterly in a volunteer capacity.

The Wattle Range CFS attends 400 incidents per year. They have 400 volunteers in their group, which is extraordinary. We have a volunteer coordinating another 400 people from the local region. There are 21 volunteer brigades in the Wattle Range Country Fire Service with 26 trucks, and they include areas like Millicent, Glencoe, Tantanoola, Mount Burr, Penola, Meningie and a range of other areas. I have to say that these volunteers are really the heroes here in South Australia. I was so delighted when the Governor mentioned them in his address because they do not get the credit they deserve and they are doing it tough at the moment.

They are under attack from this government, and there is no doubt in my mind about this. We had to fight an election when the Liberal Party and the crossbenchers in the upper house were saying that we needed equality for our firefighters in South Australia and that there should be no differentiation in terms of cancer compensation between the paid and the unpaid firefighters. The government fought that. They fought it in the parliament and they fought it in the lead-up to the election, but we did not move away from our position. We continued the fight, and we now have equality between those two groups.

Of course, the massive increase in the emergency services levy has been very difficult for them to swallow. Much of their work for their equipment, for their sheds, comes through public fundraising. Do you know how difficult it is now to go out and sell a scone to raise money for your shed at the moment, when everybody has just had a massive increase with the removal of the emergency services levy? It is absolutely extraordinary and it has made it very, very difficult.

The massive increase in the emergency services levy on households and businesses in South Australia has not delivered one additional cent in terms of equipment to the CFS, and this is something which is absolutely shameful. To add insult to injury, this government and the minister responsible for this area have shamefully tried to remove autonomy from the CFS and the SES which has served it so well.

It was great that during the fires the Premier and the minister wanted to get into selfies, pics and photo opportunities with our heroes in South Australia, but immediately afterwards they want to take away the autonomy which has served the CFS and the SES so well. To show how arrogant this government is, how out of touch this government is, this minister actually put the advertisement in the paper, for the new position to start on 1 July, even before the consultation was over. How arrogant, how out of touch is this minister to operate in such a completely and utterly disrespectful way?

This minister, quite frankly, should have been going around mowing the front lawn of every CFS volunteer in South Australia and saying, 'Thank you very much. Thank you very much for giving up your time, often putting yourself in the line of danger, giving up your time to protect the lives of South Australians, to protect the property of South Australians.' They are our heroes and they should be treated with much more respect.

This government's latest attempt to create a vision is nothing more than dreams and distractions. At this point, at this time in South Australia, what we need more than anything else are deliverables. Every government should be held accountable for what they promise. It would be far more useful for this government not to talk about updating Housing Trust properties between now and 2030. What they should be doing is saying, 'This is what we're going to do this year, this is what we're going to do next year, and this is what we're going to do the year after, which is the pre-election year,' and then the people of South Australia can hold the government accountable for what they have achieved, not what they just dreamt about.

I conclude my remarks by acknowledging the comments made by the new member for Davenport in his maiden speech. I think that certainly those on this side of the house were buoyed by that excellent speech. He will make an incredible contribution to this parliament. He comes here with great qualifications in banking and finance, but what he also spoke about, and what was very pleasing that he spoke about, were some of the other issues which have been neglected by this government for an extended period of time,

He talked about people who were disadvantaged, people who have slipped through the net here in South Australia, and he talked about the disability sector, a sector which I have a great deal of interest in and I think most members on this side have had an active interest in. He talked about trying to have people who are living with a disability engaged in employment, providing those people living with a disability with their own income, but, most importantly, making a contribution to society in South Australia.

We have been left behind in so many aspects that this government should have been focused on but they have not been focused on. They have been focused on dreams, they have been focused on distractions: they have not been focused on South Australia, they have not been focused on delivering.

Ms DIGANCE (Elder) (12:29): I thank the Governor for his address and for presenting a reinvigorated direction for South Australia's future. We can indeed be buoyed by his integrity and experience and visionary resilience and achievement. Triumphing over adversity, as demonstrated by his personal journey, our Governor, Hieu Van Le, and his wife, Lan, are people who all South Australians can be very proud of.

I congratulate our newest member of parliament, the member for Fisher. Member for Fisher, your sincere and energetic campaign saw the fruits of your labour materialise. Congratulations and welcome; Fisher is in good hands. Congratulations also to the newest member of the opposition, the member for Davenport. Well done on a first speech delivered today.

The Governor's speech gives rise to many areas of comment. Thankfully, I am an optimist and see the vision, direction and leadership in this discourse. I have chosen to speak today on but a few areas that I believe critical in supporting this renewed direction. I firstly will make reference to the Transforming Health project that sets out to ensure South Australians receive the best possible health care.

Pivotal to this refocusing of our health system are our nurses and midwives, for they play a critical and important role in shaping health care. In a few months' time, I will be paying tribute to nurses and midwives when I rise to speak in recognition of both International Day of the Midwife on 5 May and International Nurses' Day on 12 May. Both international days respectively have focal themes, being 'Midwives: for a better tomorrow' and 'Nurses: A Force for Change: Care Effective, Cost Effective'.

This year's theme of 'Nurses: A Force for Change: Care Effective, Cost Effective' gives recognition by the International Council of Nurses to the changing landscape of health care and the need to face head on the issues of our systems and the fact that nurses are central to these solutions. Healthcare costs are rising worldwide, placing a burden on healthcare systems, governments and populations. Nurses are the single largest healthcare professional workforce in the health system and are at the heart of this system. As such, they are well placed to drive both efficiency and effectiveness in improvements in quality healthcare provision, while attaining optimal population driven outcomes.

Nurses understand the setting of healthcare delivery, of cost effectiveness, resource management and financial management. Nurses are central to the attainment of the balance needed to deliver a successful health service managing the interaction between the best quality, best access and best cost effectiveness.

I know through my experience in a variety of roles throughout my nursing and midwifery career that these professionals are a resource of great knowledge, expertise, innovation and pragmatism, motivated by delivering services with patient care and good health outcomes as their focal point. We must harness their invaluable traits and engage their energy to shape a contemporary healthcare system.

When policymakers acknowledge and harness nurses as essential to shaping the direction of our healthcare system, they have a powerful group of professionals who know that being care effective and cost effective is key to improving health outcomes. It is essential to draw on the professionalism of nurses, with their experience as patient advocates, patient care experts and community needs experts. Their major contributions are much needed to engage changes in the healthcare systems.

Nurses are well placed to advise and work with policymakers, with their experience of close interaction with healthcare consumers in so many settings. They have knowledge of the impacts an environment places on clients and their families, and they know how people respond to different services and interventions. This experience and expertise must be harnessed to ensure innovation and progress are timely, with improved outcomes as the goal.

Before I leave my comments on the value of nurses and midwives, I do however believe we are well overdue for a conversation about the education model under which they study and gain work experience. To support the great work of nurses and midwives, I highlight the role of universities in their education and would suggest that a discussion on how universities relate with and coordinate places of employment, and how they can best support nurses through the pathway from when they first begin at university through the placements through to registration, is overdue.

From my experience and what I am told, many midwives, for instance, are placed under enormous competing pressures, from being their best during their studies to obtain core requirements for registration, and in many cases balancing their studies, work experience, follow through of pregnant woman, through to gaining the number of deliveries that they require for registration, while supporting themselves financially, and in many cases managing their own families on top of all of this. It raises the serious question of study/work life balance that I recommend we address.

Dovetailing into the area and expertise of nursing and midwifery is the serious issue of domestic violence, as these professionals work closely with many affected women and children. I know. I have been there at the coalface as women and children fight for safety and struggle to make sense of daily life. I have walked through the struggles with many and at times have been witness to very sad outcomes. Some of these people still haunt me today. As a clinician close to these victims as they face the most abhorrent of situations, the soul-searching can be extreme.

It is a complex situation, and I welcome the conversations and campaigns that we are now seeing as I believe we are heading in the right direction to make peace and safety everyone's right in this sphere. Our homes should be our sanctuaries where we live, love, work, play and nurture. On this subject I encourage us all to examine the use of language and, in fact, the word 'domestic'. This word seems soft, welcoming and docile. Synonyms to 'domestic' are words such as family, home and private. Words are powerful. This word perhaps can seemingly soften these horrific crimes when, in fact, acts of domestic violence fall into some of the most gruesome and insidious crimes of our community.

When we drop the word 'domestic', we are left with 'violence'. This word is cold and clear. This word is powerful and commands a different level of attention. We have seen as a case in point the use of words of a New South Wales family early last year when Daniel Christie was assaulted. The media kept referring to the perpetrator as applying a king-hit. This family knew this was the wrong term and insisted that it be called a coward's punch. A 'coward's punch' certainly changes the intent and the accent on these words.

I applaud the strategy of ensuring all government departments undertake and accomplish White Ribbon Workplace accreditation. I urge that this accreditation also be implemented within this house and be inclusive of all members of parliament. MPs are not immune to this issue and the mantra of 'walk the walk' is indeed powerful. To combat this violence it takes the engagement of all. This is everyone's business, everyone's responsibility. To undertake social change it must be integral to our community and must happen on all levels. The beneficiaries are all of us as we see the emergence of a more functional and equitable society. I hope that, in particular, the children who may have been innocent parties in such horrid situations will have the exposure minimised or halted. The consequences and possibilities of such a strategy are enormous, allowing more women not only to survive but flourish.

I now turn to the entrepreneurial spirit of many of our wonderful South Australians who champion innovation and a can-do approach. I see this on a daily basis as in my electorate I have numerous dynamic and innovative businesses and business people who I engage with regularly. I am pleased to attend the meetings of a group of energetic people who gather on a regular basis, known as the Edwardstown Regional Business Association (ERBA). Late last year the treasurer attended a well received forum and they are keen to have him back again.

I am excited to have the fast-evolving advanced manufacturing hub of Tonsley also within my electorate. The Flinders University campus, where soon students will be in attendance, is due to open next month. Within this university complex is VentureDorm which offers a well patronised entrepreneurial program. Late last year I attended their awards night and the general view amongst the local experienced and successful entrepreneurs was that a significant commercial pathway for South Australia's future was by way of start-up ventures. They cited South Australia's suitability for such commercial activity as start-up company ventures because of such factors as appropriate culture, population size and a strong history of customer focus with a demonstrated track record as a state of many firsts.

Finally, I turn to the importance and role of leadership. An important component of leadership is role modelling and leading by example, and presenting what is possible. Our Governor is unquestionably an absolute in his obvious and proven credentials. Good leadership is inclusive, based on dialogue. The Governor's address introduced a bold plan that invites conversation on many progressive propositions.

This speech may be seen by some as simply rhetoric, and we have heard that criticism. I would strongly suggest to those doubters that the address contains a blueprint underpinned by a communication strategy of demonstrated sound values and leadership. Leaders produce results. The best leaders are focused on leading change and innovation, not building a static business environment with no vision and no strategy. Leaders do not make an opposing view or offer criticism with no solution.

Leaders need to be bold and raise the controversial subjects, have a demonstrated track record of success, be excellent communicators, place an emphasis on serving those they lead, be fluid in approach, and have laser focus and a bias towards action, leading and inspiring others to action. If these traits are not possessed by our current leaders or our emerging leaders, then a rocky road ahead may prevail. Leaders need to be brave and visionary. In finishing, I will end with a quote of unknown origin: 'Leadership is the art of leading others to deliberately create a result that wouldn't have happened otherwise.'

Ms REDMOND (Heysen) (12:41): It is my pleasure to rise today to respond to the address by His Excellency, Governor Hieu Van Le. Like other speakers before me, I would first of all place on the record my utter delight at his appointment, because I am sure he will serve this state extremely well in the office of Governor, and I know that his wife Lan will do likewise as his companion in that job. Certainly, these days it is very much a job that takes two people, given the various activities in which our governors now engage. So, I do want to place on record my appreciation for the wonderful contribution that they have already made and will continue to make to this state, especially now in these new roles.

If I can move on to the actual substance of what was said in that address, which of course is prepared by the government, not by the Governor, I would have to give it a D. I would give it a D based on three words: distraction, deceit and disappointment. I notice that the leader, when he addressed us, also used D words; his were 'dreams' and 'deliverables', being things that perhaps were not addressed.

Before I go into detail on this, I will take a moment to speak about another couple of Ds; that is, the member for Davenport and his maiden speech today. I think the member for Davenport's maiden speech was eloquent and well thought out. He had obviously taken a great deal of care in putting forward his vision for what he wants to achieve in this place, the way he wants to see this state progress. Hopefully he will get the chance to do that in government at some stage, rather than simply from opposition.

When I talk about the speech being one of distraction, deceit and disappointment, I would have to say that, in its whole existence, this speech encapsulates that. As the leader pointed out, this is the third time we have reopened this parliament since the current Premier took office, and there is no reason for it other than to do distract us. It is an extremely costly exercise—costly in terms of the time taken, not just for the day itself and all of the pomp and circumstance that goes with it. I love the pomp and ceremony, I love history, and I love enjoying all of that, but for the third time since the current Premier took office seems to me to be simply over the top.

My view is that it is being done simply because he does not want to have to face up to the problems that this government has and he wants to distract us in the best way he can. Part of that is in simply reopening the parliament so that he will get to make a new speech, or have the Governor deliver on his behalf a new speech, about what his government is going to do. As the leader already eloquently pointed out earlier today, the fact is that if you go back to the earlier speeches, none of the things that have been promised in the earlier speeches have actually been delivered.

So, the government then reopens the parliament. When you think about the cost, not just for the people in here and the time taken in our Address in Reply and delivering that to the Governor and all of that but also the time of the Supreme Court justices away from their work on the bench, the time of the various military personnel who attend, the time of the police band who stay out the front and entertain the crowd, and all of the other people involved in this great big ceremonial reopening—it is for what? To distract us. Then, within the speech itself, there are all sorts of distractions, and I want to refer to a number of them. Towards the beginning of the speech the Governor said:

My government will establish a carbon neutral 'Adelaide Green Zone' to make it [Adelaide] the world's first carbon-neutral city.

It then goes on to state:

Within a decade, electric and hybrid vehicles will be the preferred form of transport within Adelaide's central business district.'

Indeed, at the bottom of that page, the speech goes on to talk about legislating for driverless vehicles in South Australia. Of course, we already know that driverless vehicles do exist, and in the mining sector there is the capacity for driverless vehicles already to be in use in some of our mining situations, particularly in open-cut mines.

However, the idea that in 2015 we are going to be legislating for driverless vehicles in this state is errant nonsense. It is simply part of the government's idea of distracting us with discussions about that and discussions about time zones. There is no doubt there is an impetus by this government to try to keep people out of the city. Either you live in the city and you can walk everywhere or travel by cycle or 'we don't want you' is basically the government's philosophy and hence their desire to introduce a car parking tax and their desire to put in cycle tracks and impede the flow of traffic.

This is a city that should, in fact, be the easiest city in the country to get around. It has the benefit of having been a planned city. It is not like Sydney, with four million people and narrow streets laid out back when it was first established as a convict settlement. This is a city that was laid out with broad boulevards, and it should be an easy city to get around. Indeed, in my view, we should be encouraging those from interstate (who could create quite a tourism boom for us) to come here, to drive here and know that this is a state and a city where you can drive easily in well signposted roads and go into the city without having to go on a tollway and get a bill for it unexpectedly a few days later.

You can come into Adelaide and have a wonderful holiday. Everything is accessible—the Barossa, McLaren Vale and so on and the wonderful wineries up in the Hills—you can do all of that. But, no, this government is intent upon trying to keep people out of the city and create congestion where none existed in order to try to force people on to public transport. I like public transport and when I go to other cities I use it, but the reality is that public transport reached its peak back when men in suits worked Monday to Friday nine to five in the CBD. That is when public transport, in the mode that we have understood it, actually reached its zenith, and that was because of those particular factors.

Nowadays it is no longer men in suits, it is no longer nine to five, it is no longer Monday to Friday and it is no longer in the CBD: work has changed. To try to then adapt our public transport system and say we are going to get more and more people on it is simply a nonsense. I think there is a place, a continuing place for public transport.

Some years ago, I had a briefing by the heads of public transport in Victoria, where they have a very sophisticated bus, train and tram network. Their great agenda was their vision of what they called '20 by 2020', and that meant 20 per cent of journeys by the year 2020 would be on public transport. In the briefing, they said that, although that was their vision, they actually thought that, at best, they would achieve 15 per cent of journeys being on public transport, which meant that 85 per cent of journeys, even in their system, were never going to be on public transport. So, to spend all of your money to try to get people out of cars when it simply does not suit the lifestyle that our modern world requires is a nonsense.

Mr Speirs: Eight per cent.

Ms REDMOND: Eight per cent of usage here, the member for Bright tells me, is on public transport. So, this idea that everyone is going to be a cyclist, pedestrian or user of public transport or, indeed, in driverless vehicles, is just a distraction. On page 8, the government goes on to say—and I love this quote:

Healthy, inclusive communities will mean more South Australians will be ready to grasp the great opportunities in our midst.

What on earth does that mean, Madam Deputy Speaker? It is just words, it is just rhetoric, and it is just a distraction.

On page 12, the great old argument of the time zone is reignited—and I keep going to say 'the Premier' but, of course, the speech is delivered by the Governor. The speech does point out that South Australia's standard time zone has not changed since May 1899, probably, I would suggest, because the shape of the world has not changed since May 1899. We are at a distance from other cities.

Indeed, if ever there was an argument for us to move to Eastern Standard Time, I would have thought that argument has been going downhill since our engaging with Asia strategy. I would have thought that, since we are already only 1½ hours off, for instance, Beijing time, it would be eminently sensible to move the extra half an hour, which geographically should put us an hour away from the Eastern Standard zone and put us directly onto one hour from Chinese time—that would make sense.

As I have said, this was raised in the middle of this speech simply as a distraction: the government is interested in distracting people from what is really important for this state, and that is the economic malaise this state is in because of the actions of this government over the whole time it has been in office. They sat there for the first seven or eight years—seven, probably—up until the global financial crisis. Every year, their budget said that they would earn a certain amount, and every year, on average, they got an extra half a billion dollars above what they expected. So, over seven years, $3½ billion—that is $3,500 million—more than they budgeted for.

We should have had money in the bank to meet the difficulties then imposed by the global financial crisis. But, no, instead of that, this government not only spent every single penny of that $3,500 million extra above its budget, it then dug a hole of debt that is so big that it is going to cost us more than a couple of million dollars a day just to pay the interest bill—not to pay it down, just to pay the interest bill. So, this government is anxious to distract us from the reality.

I would love to know, in fact, when the Premier had his epiphany about the nuclear cycle, nuclear fuel and nuclear waste because this Premier was a member of cabinet from the day he came into this house and not once in all of those years has he ever uttered a word in this chamber supporting the idea that we should even examine the idea that we have nuclear waste stored in this state. He sat there happily listening to the former premier berate the opposition over that very issue year upon year upon year. So, my question to the Premier is: when did he decide that this was an appropriate thing, and is this not just another distraction?

Deputy Speaker, I will move on—because I know I will run out of time but I will seek leave in due course to continue my remarks—to the idea that there is a lot of deceit in this speech, again, I emphasise, not by the Governor, who is simply reading the speech provided to him by the government. On page 13, the government talks about:

From 1 July, less money should be spent on election campaigns. Parties and candidates will still be able to communicate their policies to the electorate—but the need for large donations will be reduced.

The difficulty, of course, is that at no time does the government ever address the issue of union spends on their direct advertising. That is because, obviously, there would be an imposition on the very principle of free speech if governments were to start trying to regulate what people could say on their own behalf in an election campaign. But the reality is we all know that the unions do not necessarily need to provide money direct to the ALP to fund their campaigns. They can simply mount a campaign directly by producing their own advertisements, and they have done so on any number of issues over a period of years. The government also talks about new mechanisms to involve people in debate. They say:

[They] will explore new mechanisms by which everyday people—

like the rest of us are not everyday people—

can, through the use of information and communication technology, become involved in the debates of parliament—

that will be interesting—

And we will further develop other initiatives, such as the citizens' jury, to ensure that South Australian voices are heard.

I have now been in this place over 13 years and I am yet to see this government ever listen to the voices of people unless they had already decided that they agreed with what they were saying. This government has redefined the idea of consultation to mean that we will tick the box that says we have consulted. Hence, the Minister for Emergency Services says that he is going to consult about the need to reform the structure for the provision of emergency services and amalgamate SES, CFS, MFS and so on, and, having already advertised the position, then says he is going out to consultation.

The reality is that consultation, for this government, simply means that they will go out and tell people what they have already decided to do to them, and I have seen it from the very first time I came into this parliament. Every single time they say they are going to consult, it is no such thing, because consultation actually involves listening and taking notice of what people are saying, but not this government. From their point of view, consultation simply means that they will go out and tell them what they are going to do.

The issue of reforming the state's education system, which is also noted in this speech, brings me to another area altogether. This is a state which has gone so far down in its public education that we are now sitting at the bottom of all the states in most of the areas tested by NAPLAN. We used to be, proudly, the leading state, and nowadays we are at the very bottom. Our education system has failed us. The leader pointed out that, of course, the government is finally coming around to our policy of autonomy for schools and giving principals and school communities more control over their own destinies, but this government has consistently failed to address the real problems in our education.

What has been their response? First of all, they increased the school leaving age, and ever since then they have been bleating on about how magnificent it is that we have so many people retained at school, when the reality is that they are retained at school simply because the government passed a law that made it unlawful for them to leave. That is why there are more people; that is why we have a high retention rate. I would like to seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.