Motions

Regional Development Australia

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (11:31): I move:

That this house urges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government, to—

(a) provide adequate core funding for the ongoing operations of the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia; and

(b) ensure that the operational funding of the RDA network is provided annually on an uncontested basis.

I admit that this is an identical motion to the one put before the chamber last year, for which there was a good number of opposition speakers. I admit from the very outset that the world has moved forward slightly since that time, but this motion was proposed again before the minister made an announcement on 27 March, as I recollect, when he basically committed to what I have asked for and had been asking for. In my discussions with the minister, it had probably been part of his intent long term from his time of taking over the portfolio.

I will put on the record, without repeating entirely what I said last year about this, the absolute respect and importance the RDA structure has in South Australia and the critical nature of the fact that the parliament has to ensure, within its capacity to fund operations, that it is able to do what it is there for, and that is to provide a better opportunity for regional communities. That is what I stand up for and what many other members of this parliament who come from regional communities, even if they do not reside there any more, stand firmly behind and truly believe in. We want South Australians to have a vibrant, strong, economic, great social fabric, an environmentally responsible future, no matter what they do. Regional South Australia deserves exactly that same level of respect, as much as our metropolitan cousins.

The RDA structure has an interesting history. It comes from the regional development boards and the area consultative committees that were funded by the federal government. The amalgamation of those structures occurred when the member for Colton was minister. There is a local government contribution towards it, a state government contribution and a federal government contribution. The federal government has publicly lauded the fact that South Australia has that unique three-way nature of it, that it works exceptionally well and that it allows for the cohesive network of service providers in all communities to understand, to work together and to be involved in the planning of it, and to ensure that opportunities become realities. That is what I am here for, and I know that many others are here also for that, because we have to ensure that occurs.

With that agreement that occurred, my great frustration was that it was seemingly not very long after this new structure was put in place—probably five or six years ago now, in the 2010 budget—that it was flagged after the 2010 election that there would be a withdrawal of funds from the RDA structures from July 2013. That gutted me, I must say, along with many other members who have seen good work by the RDA structures and wanted to support them and understood that the RDA staff in many cases are very dedicated, not being paid an exceptionally high amount of money. They have extensive networks of people across their community they talk to and can join together so that the dots are connected and opportunities result from that.

My concern was that, without some surety of funding in the longer term, even though in respecting that it always has to be a three or four-year agreement—I understand that there have to be time frames in place and key performance indicators have to be set as part of that also—but surety had to be attached to it.

Minister O'Brien was in this chamber at the time and I was asking him questions in estimates, and it was with great frustration because I thought he understood my point and accepted that but, looking forward, was not able to ensure that it had a financial future. It then transferred to minister Gago, who restructured the Regional Development Fund slightly (the $3 million that was available for projects), took some of that back ($200,000 approximately for each of the seven RDAs), and left the $1.6 million remaining in the Regional Development Fund, but there was still that level of frustration.

Then, when the election was held last year, minister Brock, the member for Frome, assumed the position of Minister for Regional Development and got the opportunity for a level of funding to exist. He had a very strong commitment from the Premier of $3 million to be available, and Regional Development Funds and job creation funds, the $39 million that the minister refers to quite often for the 2014-15 year, which in many cases was an exact example of what we took to the people of South Australia in the 2014 election. It was important to me that instead of it being project based, it actually be core funding. For me it is not though, and I know for the minister also, from our discussions.

It is not just the fact that the reassurance of the dollars is there and you do not need to ensure the outcomes. It has to be focused on outcomes. There have to be reportable opportunities. There has to be a chance for communities to appreciate what has been done and see the tangible examples and outcomes of it to ensure that it is there. I am not sure if it is the result of good work by the minister, the continued lobbying by the opposition or the desires of the RDA networks themselves. The minister points to his chest and I can understand that because I know he has been committed on that too, and the results of the 2014 election created that rather unique situation for particular assurances to be given, but it was frustrating.

Minister, in your discussions with the RDA structures, I think they would have told you of the frustration they had, initially, when it was project based, but there are processes that have to be worked with. From my point of view, it was the length of time taken for the processes to occur. The 27 March announcement this year by the minister confirmed the support of the RDA networks, the Hon. Rob Kerin as the chair of RDA SA and the funding commitments put in place for three years, which I believe will have strong outcomes (as it has to).

It gives some level of assurance to local government, as a key funding supporter of it, and the federal government, as a key funding supporter of the RDA structures, that there is very tangible support from the state government, unless, across a $16 billion budget, we do not have the capacity to put resources in to ensure that all have access to support, mentoring, assistance, training and connection to those who actually know how to solve a problem; case managers within government departments, advisers who work with the minister. That is the critical role that I think the RDA structures play; they have very large areas that they support and they have done it tough for some time.

I know that RDA boards and their staff had to instigate, not necessarily austerity measures, but they had to ensure that they operated as well as possible, financially. They spent an enormous amount of time on the road, meeting people personally, doing all the telephone calls and that sort of stuff. They are not just based in their offices expecting everybody to come to them. They go out to the people with the opportunities that exist. I think the continuous call the opposition has made for an adequate level of core funding support has been heard, and the minister has ensured that was heard on 27 March when he made the announcement.

So, the mood has changed somewhat, I think it is fair to say. I did consider the appropriateness of this motion continuing, but I believe it is a worthy debate for the parliament to hold. There are other members of the opposition who also want to speak to it to enforce the positive aspects of what they see the Regional Development Australia network in their electorate is doing and the absolute desire for the funding support to still be there. I know the minister, like other members, has visited the RDA networks across the state and I know we have all seen the great examples of where a level of financial support has created an outcome that might not have ever existed unless there was some physical resource there to help them through the process.

No matter what we have done in our life, when we come into this place there are people who tell us that they have an idea and they want to know where to take that idea, and it is not until you have been here for a while or had worldly experiences that give you relationships with others that you are able to ensure that they get that level of support. While members of parliament have to have that skill—that is one of the basics we have to possess—for an RDA officer, it is absolutely key, too, no matter what role they have within the RDA.

I see great examples of absolute dedication. There was one chap who used to work for the RDA board for Yorke and the Mid North who has semiretired, he does not work for them anymore, and I can assure you, Deputy Speaker, he is one of the very few people in the world that I actually trust with my life. That is the level of confidence I had and still have in that chap. I had seen him for many years before he came into the RDA structure and he was absolutely committed. Before I came into this place, I was part of the interview panel that appointed him. He was anxious about the fact that he had to wear a tie to go to the interview because it was not how he dressed normally. He gave it to us exactly how he felt, but that is the sort of commitment and emotion we wanted to see, and that is what I see demonstrated through so many Regional Development Australia board employees.

In standing up and moving this motion, it is not just a push for adequate resources to be provided but it is a level of respect that we hold for the structures as they exist, and it is not just the staff; it is the board members, too. There have been some changes across the board to the membership. As I understand it, the negotiations between the Hon. Warren Truss, minister Brock and David O'Loughlin (as then president of the Local Government Association) announced some changes. I will put on the record that former member for Schubert Ivan Venning was appointed the chair of the Barossa RDA. I pay my respects to Mr Ian O'Loan, who had been chair before that and who was a board member with me on the previous Yorke Regional Development Board some years ago. I have seen great examples also of what he has done in his ability to negotiate through challenging times.

To all of those people, no matter where they are from, who are on boards, who are staff of the RDA, I pay homage to them because they are very much the unseen heroes of a community. It is a word used very easily, I understand that, but I know that for many of them they have continuous conversations about ensuring that the smallest of ideas that might start to develop in someone's mind actually has the greatest opportunity to grow into a vision and that vision becoming a reality.

I am exceptionally pleased to note the minister's commitment to $3 million per year. I note that it is for a three-year period. The minister has not talked to me about what KPIs exist within it—and we might discuss that in estimates in more detail—but, from the discussions I held with the minister, I absolutely support him on the principle of that being in place. It is a change for the good. I think that sometimes notices of motion can be around political opportunity, but I believe that, where are change occurs between the notice given and the debate occurring, the full information needs to be provided. That is why I ensured I gave to opposition members who flagged their interest in speaking to this motion a copy of the minister's press release, because I wanted them all to have the updated information.

The minister flagged to me that it he might amend this motion, although I have not yet seen the words; however, I respect that, as the world has changed on the issue, there might be an opportunity for that. In between other members speaking, I might have a little chat to the minister. The RDA boards will hopefully continue to be here, they will work hard, they will get support very strongly from members of parliament.

My hope is that, no matter what occurs in the political realm in the future, whoever is in government will continue to support it. I give the absolute assurance that for as long as I live, breathe and remain in this house, I will ensure that from an opposition and Liberal Party perspective I continue to push it. I know I have many supporters amongst my colleagues here who have seen what they do and want to support it to ensure that the RDA structure continues to prosper but, importantly, that from their hard work society and regional communities prosper. I commend the motion to the house.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:43): I move to amend the motion as follows:

That this house acknowledges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government, for—

(a) securing $3 million per annum in funding for the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia;

(b) ensuring the RDA network is also able to apply for funds from the $15 million Regional Development Fund; and

(c) complementing federal and local government funding to the RDA network across the nation.

I agree with many of the sentiments expressed by the member for Goyder. I know that he has a very strong commitment to regional development, like all of us here, but especially those of us who come from country electorates. We want to see the regions thrive. I do not doubt the commitment of those opposite to seeing that.

The South Australian government recognises the significant contribution regional communities make to the economy and prosperity of our state. The government acknowledges the need to support regional communities to achieve growth and development and to generate vitality. The government has made a substantial commitment to regional development articulated in the Charter for Stronger Regional Policy and in funding commitments amounting to $39 million in 2014-15 and $29 million per annum thereafter. These commitments include an increase in funding for Regional Development Australia associations from $1.4 million to a total of $3 million per annum.

Following consultation with RDAs on funding arrangements for the next three years, RDAs self determined the distribution of the $3 million between them. RDAs will provide a three-year project plan reflecting priorities identified by their communities. The effect of the new funding arrangement is that the South Australian government continues to be the major funding partner of South Australian RDAs.

The RDA program is a nationwide commonwealth initiative, and in South Australia it was based on a tripartite understanding between commonwealth, state and local governments. Indeed, that is an understanding that goes back many years. The success of the RDA program, which is also managed by the commonwealth, has been attributable to all three tiers of government working together to establish clear direction and agreed priorities for RDAs to work on in their communities.

In October 2014, the Hon. Warren Truss MP, commonwealth Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, announced that, following a review of the RDA program, the commonwealth had decided to retain the existing 55 RDA associations across the country. However, minister Truss also outlined his expectation that RDAs focus more strongly on economic development and facilitating local projects that make a difference to their communities.

I acknowledge the work of Warren Truss in not doing what often happens when governments change at a federal level and tear apart structures that are in place and reinvent new ones. It is good to see that continuity. I can advise that the South Australian government strongly supports the direction set by the federal minister and that the funding arrangements that have been put in place for the next three years by the state government will allow RDAs to pursue a work program that will achieve this goal on behalf of the state government.

The state government has developed strong relationships with the South Australian RDAs. During 2014, Regions SA worked with the RDAs to establish a new framework for regional collaboration. Regions SA and chief executive officers of the RDAs held a number of meetings to develop a framework that guides their collaborative efforts. The framework recognises that both parties have a strong alignment of roles and responsibilities for advancing the economic prosperity and growth of our regions. The framework acknowledges the importance of working towards a collaborative approach and also acknowledges the existing and separate relationship that each party has with the commonwealth and local governments and the benefits that these relationships can bring to maximising investment for regional development.

As mentioned, the South Australian government has recently been able to consolidate its strong relationships with RDAs with a three-year funding arrangement that provides for a renewed emphasis on regional economic development. State government funding is being provided to RDAs based on agreed grant funding guidelines that incorporate activities for all three tiers of government. In particular, RDAs will receive funding to:

1. Identify and drive priority activities that will generate economic development in South Australia's regional areas, taking into account the resources and aspirations of regional communities as well as the plans of the state, commonwealth and local governments.

2. Assist stakeholders and proponents to develop viable project proposals and support them to identify and access funding sources.

3. Provide advice to the South Australian government on current issues, challenges and opportunities in regional areas.

4. Assist the state, commonwealth and local governments to promote awareness of government initiatives and access to government programs.

The funding that has been provided to RDAs will enable them to undertake a broad range of activities that will drive regional economic development and allow them to make a real and lasting difference in regional communities on behalf of the government.

In addition to the state and federal funding that is provided directly to RDAs, it must be remembered that RDAs are eligible to apply for grant funds from the expanded $15 million Regional Development Fund. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage RDAs to be proactive in identifying projects that are being considered in their communities and to ensure that all available avenues are pursued to progress these projects. RDAs are able to provide advice and assistance to proponents in accessing not only the $15 million Regional Development Fund but also the federal government's National Stronger Regions Fund.

I am confident that the three tiers of government have set a clear direction for RDAs in terms of driving economic growth and development in South Australia's regions. Governments have also committed substantial funds to ensuring priority investments are made in regional communities. The work of RDAs will be vital in ensuring that this direction and these funds are channelled to the right projects that result in real and lasting growth. The collaboration that has taken place to date between governments and RDAs will pave the way for some fantastic results for regional South Australia and I look forward to receiving updates on these results from the Minister for Regional Development in the future.

I spent probably 10 years of my life as a member of an economic development board, the Whyalla economic development board, before it amalgamated and became the Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula regional development association. I will put a bit of flesh on those comments when it comes to funding and what it might mean for individual boards. The Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula regional development association receives $475,000 in funding from the state government, guaranteed over three years; the 11 councils on Eyre Peninsula provide $340,000, and the Whyalla city council is the biggest funder amongst the councils on Eyre Peninsula; and the federal government provides $220,000. So we are talking about over a million dollars to assist the board to carry out its operations.

The board itself employs 15 to 16 people. The only quibble I would have with the employment of those 15 to 16 people is that most of them are now employed in Port Lincoln and only 3.5 in Whyalla, so I think that is something that needs to be addressed. It is worth noting that the current chair of the Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula regional development association, Jim Pollock (who is also the mayor of the Whyalla community), in his feedback on the changes that have occurred, indicated that the minister is doing the right thing.

Jim would only say that if he truly believed it and if he believed that it was in the interest of his community and his region, because he is a non-partisan individual. If it was a Liberal minister who had introduced something of a similar nature, he would also be saying to that minister, 'You have done the right thing.' It is interesting to reflect that Jim Pollock was a former candidate of the Liberal Party for the seat of Giles but, like I said, he always plays a straight bat and he is a decent bloke.

The member for Goyder made many comments about the importance of the regional development boards and how they can take an idea that often comes from someone with a bit of an entrepreneurial spirit, work with that person and work with the different levels of government to translate that idea into a real tangible benefit for communities. Let us hope that we see more of that, and far more of that in the future.

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (11:54): I rise today to speak on this motion. Before I go into some of the specifics of the work that the RDA does in my area, I want to talk about this motion, the amendment and where we sit today. I find it quite interesting, and maybe just a little disingenuous of this government, that they sit here and talk about championing RDAs and the work they do in the country because, had they won majority government in their own right at the last election, none of this would have been delivered and, to sit here now and say, 'We've delivered for the regions,' is a very hypocritical move by the Labor Party. We are not only talking about the recurrent funding for RDAs: we are also talking about the Regional Development Fund and the jobs acceleration program. We are talking about everything that the minister and the member for Frome put in his agreement.

Can I say that RDAs have obviously got confidence for the next three years and that leads us close enough to the next election at which time a responsible Liberal government can make sure that the RDAs are saved over the longer term, but RDAs should not have too much faith in what the Labor government does, because the Labor government was prepared to cut their funding and it was prepared to leave them in a ditch. It is only because of a minority government situation where the member for Frome's vote became vital to the continuation of a Labor government that we have these things in place today. We can all celebrate the good work that the RDAs do but I do not think that, apart from the member for Frome, the government can sit here and claim any credit for anything. In fact, they should just sit down and be quiet in this regard.

The reason the RDAs are so important is, if you come out to regional areas—a place, I might add, that produces over 50 per cent of the merchandise exports of South Australia and a place that houses about a third of the state's population in those seven RDA districts—and you are looking for business support services, if you are looking as a small business to start up, be able to find your way in your region and be able to access opportunities, it is only the RDA that you can turn to. There is nothing else, absolutely nothing else, besides the RDA that you can turn to. So, to say that this is vital for the regions, is an understatement.

I know the RDA does good work for two reasons. The first is the people who seek to get involved who obviously see good value in these things; and the second is the work that they do, and I will get to that a little later. The RDA that covers most of the population of my electorate is RDA Barossa, which takes in the four councils of Mallala, Light, Barossa and Gawler. All of those four councils provide people to go onto the RDA and they are extremely good and valuable in their input, and I have met all the people on the board and all the representatives; but it is the non local government representatives, for me, that highlight how important this board is to our local community.

In the Barossa, we have a new chair. We have the venerable Ivan Venning, who promised me that he would stay out of Barossa affairs for 12 months, and he kept his pledge, but he has jumped right back in as chair of the RDA Barossa; and, can I say, I could not be any more pleased. He is a man who deeply understands our region and the priorities for our region, and he is a great advocate for all things Barossa, and I mean in the broader RDA map Barossa sense. He is also a man who knows how to promote the Barossa in the broader regional sense. I am very grateful and glad to have him along.

We have, as the deputy chairman, Alex Zimmerman, who is the commander of the local service area in the Barossa and a very highly respected local. We have Victoria McClurg, a local cheesemaker whose cheese factory is about 150 metres from my house. At the moment, she is extending her premises so that she can develop new cheese styles to bring to market. As I walk past every few days to get my wife a coffee from Casa Carboni, I have a look at the progress. I have not been home this week yet because parliament has been sitting but, when I was there on Sunday, the concrete floors had been laid, the walls were already up and it was at the stage where they can start to finish the externals of the building and build the internals.

We also have a local winemaker, Rolf Binder of Rolf Binder Wines—Veritas wines is another one of his labels—involved with the committee. Rolf is a very well-respected local winemaker. He is very open and has a very gregarious personality. His Bulls Blood icon red wine sits up there with the best that the Barossa has to offer. He is a man who gives back to his community in a variety of ways and one of those is through the RDA Barossa. His presence on that board definitely lends weight to it.

We have Wayne Perry, who is involved with the northern futures project. He has now gone out on his own, consulting, but he has been very heavily involved in trying to connect young people to job opportunities and to help young people access job opportunities in the Barossa region. He has been a great advocate for that.

We have Tony Clark who is a man I have heard speak a number of times on a whole variety of topics. Chief amongst those was the fact that we should be looking to invest in the broader agricultural/horticultural region in pomegranates because, he says, pomegranate juice is a huge export opportunity to China. They cannot grow enough of these things and pomegranate juice is extremely important. It is something that stuck in the back of my head. Unfortunately, I have never had the spare capital and the land to be able to plant some pomegranate trees, but it is something that has stuck with me. He understands those opportunities and, again, he adds weight to the board.

We have a gentleman called Andrew Morphett who, amongst other things, is a co-owner of Anlaby Station, which is very famous, north of Kapunda. They have taken to looking after Anlaby Station and making sure that it works and is restored to its former glory. I have had a few functions out there and they were really fantastic.

Lastly, we have Sarah Henderson who runs the Novotel Barossa. I sat on a board with her when I was chair of Barossa Food and, again, she is someone who has strong input and strong love for, and understanding of, the region. She is someone who was not born and raised in the region but who has definitely taken to the Barossa culture and lifestyle.

The RDAs are so important. When I became a new member of parliament, I had spent the previous 12 months going around trying to understand my electorate, writing notes and doing my research. I went to meet with the RDA and its fantastic CEO, Anne Moroney, and we sat down to discuss the priorities for the region. She handed me the roadmap that they have developed and every single issue that people had put to me about helping to improve our region was in the RDA roadmap.

The roadmap encompassed tourism and the need for a new Barossa hospital. On that topic, I would love to be able to work with the RDA to produce an addendum to a future Barossa hospital case that can look at more innovative ways to fund a Barossa hospital. It covered transport and dealing with improved passenger transport networks, such as Northern Expressway connectors, as well as things like digital connectivity and broadband.

High-speed broadband in the Barossa is a huge problem, especially when you get outside of the townships, and especially when we have quite a strong entrepreneurial spirit. We have a lot of people who need access to broadband and we are excited that, over the next 12 months, we expect the NBN to come to the Barossa. Through a combination of fibre to the node and fixed wireless, we should see improved megabits per second (if that is the correct term), but we should also start to see coverage in those blackspots where we have small business owners trying to get on and improve their opportunities in our region.

The roadmap addresses areas from premium food and wine profitability, which is something that I have spent quite a lot of time trying to push through Barossa Food and various other organisations, to improved advanced manufacturing and water for the future. Every single priority on the RDA Barossa's roadmap is something that I have dealt with in a community sense and it has been put together in a very concise document. The RDA in the Barossa is extremely connected to the community; it is a very fundamental organisation. Without it, the region would be lost, so to say that recurrent, ongoing funding for the RDA is vital is an understatement.

In the last few seconds, I would like to mention that part of my electorate takes in the Adelaide Hills, Fleurieu and Kangaroo Island RDA. I have yet to go and visit them, but their CEO is a gentleman named Damien Cooke who has had decades of experience helping companies to export overseas. I know he lived in South Africa with his family; in fact, I know him reasonably well because he was my high school rowing coach. He is a man who instilled in me a lot of discipline and strength and whom I greatly admire and look up to. It is good to see him giving back to his community by helping out the Adelaide Hills RDA.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:04): I too rise to support the member for Goyder's motion. Listening to the member for Goyder, I think that he is across the RDA spectrum. He has been concerned about the future of RDA since I entered this place, and it has been a note of concern as to where the government's support of RDA was going.

I will acknowledge that minister Brock has adopted the 2014 Liberal Party policy, and I congratulate him on that. I think that we as a party stumped up the support and funding. We gave an assurance to the seven RDAs in South Australia that we as a party were going to make a decision that we recognised the RDAs as significant contributors not only in developing confidence in people to invest but also in supporting those entrepreneurs who are part of our communities and part of our economy.

I really do think that the establishment of RDAs, and the confidence they instil in the business sector particularly, is a great boost for emerging new businesses. I guess they give good feedback. They also go out there and research. In a lot of ways, they are a conduit for the research arm that gives confidence to people who are looking at investing significant amounts of money in most cases.

What was missing previously was what we call the 'Brockument'. The minister, coming into this place, obviously had some agreements with the Premier. Some of them were questionable, but he is slowly oozing out some of those 'Brockument' commitments or policy decisions. I think that this RDA commitment does have a political smell about it. I agree with the member for Schubert. He was quite forthright with his view, and I noticed that a number of members opposite really raised their eyebrows, but I think the truth does hurt.

There was a political decision behind what funding was reduced under the previous minister. I had many robust discussions with the previous minister for regional development, and it was clear that she struggled with the portfolio. The telling factor was that many of the RDAs, including the Murraylands and Riverland RDA, were living on life support. They did not know from one day to the next whether they had a job. They did not know what security their job had. They did not know what lease arrangements were on buildings or on vehicles.

The way I would describe it is that many of those employees were living day to day. Their focus was on the survival within the organisation more than doing what they were there to do, and that was to generate interest and confidence and to reassure investors and entrepreneurs that their ideas were good or, if they were not up to scratch, to help them research and better present their applications or models.

Most of these businesses do seek funding. In today's world, when trying to start up a business, if you are looking for a funding stream there is a huge amount of work in filling out the forms, filling out the applications and putting up prospectuses. In many cases, people have good business models but, in some cases, they need that assistance to cross the t's, dot the i's and make sure that they are credible applications for projects that will benefit the economy, particularly that of the regions.

One of the issues I would like to talk about is the Murraylands and Riverland board, which I have engaged with during my time in this place. I will only speak for this board, but I have met with other RDA organisations, and I think everyone has the best interests of their regions and areas at heart. I know that they do meet, they do talk and they do share ideas, and I think this state can be a better state with a collaborative approach with RDAs.

Working in individual silos is always dangerous, and I think it always harbours a lack of productivity, particularly given what we have seen. I must say, when the RDA Murraylands and Riverland was rolled into one organisation there were a few teething problems due to the parochialism between one area or district and the other, but they soon worked it out. They worked out that working collaboratively was in the best interests of good projects in both the Murraylands and the Riverland and was going to benefit their regions and the state as a whole.

Let's face it, a lot of the projects that come into the Murraylands and Riverland districts revolve around food production and value-adding, as well as other areas. I commend the work of the two officers in the Riverland branch, Nicole Jachmann and Mark Bell; I think they do a great job. They are headed up by the former CEO, Brenton Lewis. I think Brenton had been there for a number of years, from the instigation of the RDA and amalgamation of the Murraylands and Riverland districts. He did a great job, and was a fierce advocate when seeking funding for his branch. Brenton was always up for the chase, and never held back on a good argument or robust discussion, and I think that is what it was about.

We now look at accessing commonwealth government money. The RDAIF is a big carrot. Occasionally, these groups get hold of that money, and they make a difference. But, what we are seeing at the moment is that the uncertainty is partially behind us. The money that is coming in to the region—I know that the member for Hammond and I have talked about diversification money. A lot of those projects were put before governments through the RDA. I know that some of those were failed projects from other application streams, and some of them are new applications. I think the Minister for Regional Development now needs to get on with securing a funding stream.

It is sad to see that we have potentially lost $25 million worth of diversification money that came under the basin plan pool of funding. I understand the minister is up against a government that has proudly said they will not accept money coming in for RDA projects because it is not their constituency. It is a $25 million pool of money, and I think it is outrageous, particularly for the Treasurer, to tell me that he would rather spend the GST component of that money elsewhere. It just smacks of political bias.

The other thing that really does concern me is that not one Treasury official, nor the Treasurer, nor the Premier, nor the Minister for Regional Development could actually give me proof that there was that large GST component of that $25 million. No-one gave me the proof. I travelled to Canberra and asked the deputy minister for proof. I wanted some proof from the commonwealth Treasurer's department, but they could not give it to me. I went to great lengths to find out exactly how this state's river communities could have benefited from that money, but no-one actually gave me a credible argument as to why there was a GST component.

But what really does smack of political bias is that a government would walk away from the regions that it relied on during the drought for the water supply here in Adelaide. It is time for the government to stand up and make good on the commitment that those regions gave to the people of Adelaide, the people of South Australia, that when they turned on a tap they had water, and the reason that they had water is because they had the irrigators' water. I think there is more to come out of that now. I hope that the minister will fight for some form of compensation, and I look forward to his reply.

Mr TARZIA (Hartley) (12:15): I also rise to commend the member for Goyder and support his motion:

That this house urges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government, to—

(a) provide adequate core funding for the ongoing operations of the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia; and

(b) ensure that the operational funding of the RDA network is provided annually on an uncontested basis.

I understand that South Australia's seven Regional Development Australia associations will continue to receive state government funding for the next three years, and those organisations will certainly receive a share of $3 million over three years. Obviously, this is intended to boost economic development. I understand that it is the Riverland and also the Murraylands that receive $450,000 a year under what is the new funding agreement, with $400,000 per year for the RDA of the Limestone Coast. Obviously, the minister took some lobbying to come to the table. All I will say, quite respectfully, is for a minister for this area, we would like to see more.

I acknowledge the good work of the member for Goyder and the lobbying that he has done to ensure that this sort of funding continues in the future. As state Liberals, we have always been supportive of the work undertaken in the regions by the RDA SA network. It goes without saying, and many of my esteemed colleagues have also said that. It is also the case that, in the lead-up to the last state election, we were the ones who announced our regional development policy to reinstate annual funding to the seven RDAs at a level of $3 million, because we in the Liberal Party are serious about the regions. We are not fairweather supporters for the regions. We support the regions through thick and thin, even if there are not marginal seats in the region to win.

It is really important that this government does more for the regions, not only for this area but also across the state. Often, time and time again, we see so much pork-barrelling in marginal seats in the city where they think the seats are to win. However, we all know that our regions are second-to-none. We cannot abandon the backbone of our economy. They are one of the few regions that are actually excelling and doing quite well, and the regions are growing at the moment. Look at our exports, which need to be doing better, but so much of the engine room comes through things like agriculture and agribusiness, which are derivative from the regions.

I will be brief on this motion. I commend the member for Goyder, who is a passionate advocate for the regions. I thank the member for—

The Hon. G.G. Brock: Frome.

Mr TARZIA: Frome. I was going to say the member for Port Pirie—you basically are the member for Port Pirie.

The Hon. G.G. Brock: The minister.

Mr TARZIA: The minister—I thank the minister for coming to the party, a little bit late, but he has come to the party. For the good of these regions, I want to see this funding to continue, and I commend the motion to the house.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (12:18): I rise to speak to this motion tabled by the member for Goyder:

That this house urges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government, to—

(a) provide adequate core funding for the ongoing operations of the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia; and

(b) ensure that the operational funding of the RDA network is provided annually on an uncontested basis.

I think that is the core of the issue, because what we saw earlier, and other members have spoken in regard to the 'Brockument' and the deal that the member for Frome cut with the Labor Party, was the simple fact that there was not that continual core funding there for regional development bodies across this state.

I will declare my interest: I was a member of the Murraylands board before I was elected and my wife, before that time, was working with the Murray Mallee Strategic Task Force to get better outcomes for the Murraylands and Mallee. She was certainly the lead in getting the Telstra phone tower at Alawoona.

This money is absolutely vital in regard to all the regional development bodies right across the state. It is interesting to note that on 27 March, after much lobbying from this side of the house and the continual persistence of the member for Goyder, which I congratulate, the member for Frome, the Minister for Regional Development, issued a press release with the $3 million core funding agreement for three years. That is a good thing, but why did it take a bit of push and shove to get there?

The split goes this way: RDA Yorke and Mid North, $475,000; RDA Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula, $470,000; RDA Far North, $400,000; RDA Limestone Coast, $400,000; RDA Barossa, $380,000; the two RDAs that affect my electorate, RDA Murraylands and Riverland, $450,000; and RDA Adelaide Hills, Fleurieu, and Kangaroo Island, $425,000. That is welcome funding, but why is it not the core of any government in this state to make sure that this funding is in place? This state does not end at Gepps Cross or the tollgate, and it is about time members of the Labor government realised that.

What we see time and time again, especially with the Premier and the Treasurer, is that they talk about not doing things for a constituency which is not their core constituency. The member for Chaffey rightfully mentioned the $25 million that looks to be lost from the diversification funding for the Riverland and Murraylands and the government making the point that, 'It is not our constituency. Why should we deal with it?' I remind the government, the Premier, the Treasurer, and all those below them that they are supposedly here to govern for all South Australia and that it should not matter whether seats are blue, red or marginal. It should not matter a darn, quite frankly.

The simple fact is that around 400,000 people live in the regions, and the regions actually supply over 50 per cent of the economic base of this state. The government was so keen to acknowledge the mining sector with the proposed expansion of the Olympic Dam mine, and they are so keen to acknowledge in statements since that did not happen that now we will rely on the clean green environment and the produce from that environment, but it is all talk.

We have a government that goes around the state with their so-called community forums, the community cabinet, but what is the point? It is just a lot of hot air. They do not really care about the regions. It is just to tick the boxes against the 'Brockument'. I just think it is disgraceful how they treat country areas of this state. I have had plenty of conversations with the Minister for Regional Development. He has to work a hell of a lot harder to make sure that we get more funding to the regions right across the state and he has to make his presence felt. Sadly, I do not think the Premier and the Treasurer take too much notice of him. That is not a reflection on him; I just think they do not care. In fact, I know they do not care about the regions.

Members interjecting:

Mr PEDERICK: It is not rubbish because we have just lost $25 million—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I'm on my feet. I know it is hard to tell. It means you sit down. It is unparliamentary to interject; it is unparliamentary to respond to interjections. I would ask all members to observe standing order 142 and keep their noise to a minimum and listen to the member for Hammond in silence. Member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your protection. If what I am saying is rubbish, why, all of a sudden, do I have 21 projects across the Murraylands and Riverland that have missed out on their funding? Why is that?

The Hon. P. Caica interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I won't have it. The chamber is entitled to hear the debate in silence. Member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and if members on the other side want to argue the case, argue the case in contributions—that is what we are here for—get up when it is your opportunity to speak. They are the simple, cold hard facts. That money has gone missing from Riverland and Murraylands communities because of the sheer arrogance of the Premier, the Treasurer and all those on the other side of the house in the government. It is the sheer arrogance of a party that does not give a flying toss about regional South Australia. It is an absolute disgrace that we are losing opportunities for employment and for the spending of millions of dollars in regional communities.

I look at the Gifford Hill project which, over 20 or 30 years plus, would have brought in $1 billion of income to Murray Bridge and surrounding areas but, no, this state government turns its back. I will be the first one to get up and thank the state government if there is a chance but I think that chance is gone, mind you, because assistant federal minister Jamie Briggs said it was gone if it was not accepted by the federal budget day which was Tuesday.

If that money somehow comes back to those communities in the form of those projects, I will be the first one to get up and thank the government, but they keep playing politics. They keep talking about the GST issues that will happen with that money. What about the nearly $900 million heading towards $1 billion of unallocated GST funding that will come to this state over the next four years—and that is a fact? This $25 million is a very small amount compared to that amount of money.

I will say that is pleasing to see that this money has come into place for these RDAs for regional development. It is absolutely vital that we keep the cohesive work between local government and the other tiers of government as much is possible. However, the trouble is we see this infighting with financial agreements that goes on now, where too many people decide they want to play politics with money that should be allocated to the regions—money that is absolutely vital and money that does not come up every day of the week by any means throughout regional South Australia.

Regional South Australians are due their money as much as anyone else. Just because the main populous lives in the urban areas, does not mean all of the money needs to go there. Yes, regional South Australians use urban areas for education, health, business and a range of activities, but we have to remember that the wealth of this state comes from regional South Australia, whether it is in our food production or our mining capabilities. It is a very sad day when it appears that a state Labor government talks the talk but will not walk the walk and put a real contribution into regional South Australia.

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton) (12:28): I will be brief. I rise to speak in favour of the amended motion. I do have a tiny bit of background in this area. I recall when we first came to government, I think it was under the Howard government, where they had the area consultative committees that were in essence replicating what our regional development boards were doing in the areas.

Labor came to government at the federal level and decided to do away with those area consultative committees, which was the right thing to do, and jointly with the state developed the Regional Development Australia boards throughout regional South Australia. I had a bit to do with it.

I not only want to congratulate the minister for the work that he has done since he has been in cabinet in ensuring that appropriate funding arrangements have been available to the regional areas in a variety of areas, but in particular I want to refute the comments of the member for Hammond. You invited me to do so by getting on my feet, Deputy Speaker.

His view that our view that South Australia stops at Gepps Cross is just nonsense. We on this side fully understand the importance of regional South Australia. It is the single underpinning plank that drives our economy. We can talk about mining, but we know that mining goes in a boom and bust, and that we have got to make hay when the sun shines, when the commodity prices are right, but it is nothing for a mining company to close down its operations with very short notice and reopen it again when the times are better, and we see that. In no way am I understating the importance of mining to South Australia, but the point I am making is that this state relies so heavily on the contribution of regional South Australia through its agriculture and all aspects of—

Mr van Holst Pellekaan interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: Well, I happen to have been, and one day you might be, a minister, but no-one on that side, as I recall, has been to date, and you have got another three and a half years to go before you could be. I was agriculture minister for a period of time and also the water and environment minister, which took me out into the beautiful areas of South Australia and gave me a clear understanding—although I understood beforehand—of the importance of the role of regional South Australia in its significant contribution to this economy. So I refute the comments of the member for Hammond; they were absolute nonsense. I did also notice too that the member for Hammond said that his wife was, I think, very important in the area in getting the tower somewhere in the Mallee—

Mr Pederick: Alawoona.

The Hon. P. CAICA: Alawoona. Well, I congratulate Mrs Pederick for doing more for her area than the member for Hammond has done since his time here. She should be the member—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: That's right; she should be the member.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr van Holst Pellekaan: They're a strong team.

The Hon. P. CAICA: Yes, and she is the main player of that team. Notwithstanding that particular comment, I want to reinforce a couple of points. The point that I started off with was about the contribution of the minister and the role that he plays around cabinet, and not only that, but his advocacy for the regional areas, which manifests itself in the funding that he has been able to get. We have heard—and this happens quite often—members opposite quite rightly congratulating my good friend, the member for Goyder, for the work he did and for the lobbying he did to get there, but it really wasn't the member for Goyder. It was, in fact, the minister who got that funding via cabinet to be distributed throughout regional South Australia. I congratulate him for that.

I was talking to the member for Chaffey this morning about the work that is going to be done up at Loxton. Loxton, as anyone in this room would know, was a shining light in the role that it played in supporting primary industry in this state. And it did fall by the wayside, but its future is looking very rosy, I think, in the role that it is going to play in the future, a role that we know can significantly contribute to that which underpins our economy year in and year out, that is, primary production in its various forms in this state.

Another issue that was raised by the member for Hammond was the $25 million that was to be distributed through the federal government for various water saving initiatives. I want to make this point: that was a deal that was struck by the Premier in relation to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. There was never to be any caveats on how that money would be funded. It is coming off our GST, but the point—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: It's 21 projects—but the point I want to make is that the member for Hammond says, 'You've done nothing about it.' Well, I will tell you who has done nothing about it: the opposition have done nothing about it, because they have not bothered to speak to their colleagues in Canberra—

Mr Pederick: That's a lie.

The Hon. P. CAICA: That's a lie—oh!

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P. CAICA: That's a lie, is it?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

An honourable member interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have asked both sides to observe the standing orders and listen to each member as they speak on their feet. It goes to both sides of the chamber. I have been as harsh on my colleagues to my right as I am on my colleagues to my left, so I really cannot have the shouting backwards and forwards. The member for Colton is entitled to be heard in silence.

Mr GRIFFITHS: If I may make a point of order, the member for Colton in his contribution was in this chamber at the time when the member for Chaffey spoke about the meetings he had had in Canberra with members of the Coalition.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am not going into who said what. I am concerned about the loudness of the debate and the interjections. If you have a problem with what was said in the context of the debate, you know what you can do; there are ways to address that. I am asking members to observe standing orders and to listen to each other in silence.

The Hon. P. CAICA: Thank you very much. Unlike the member for Hammond, I do not need your—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, that is not necessary.

The Hon. P. CAICA: I do not need your protection, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I am very thankful that you are directing a spat to a proper observation of the standing orders. I apologise for breaching those and I promise not to do it again

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ever or just today?

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P. CAICA: Certainly, for the purposes of Hansard, not over the next four minutes. I would make this point: if, as the member for Hammond says, what I said was a lie—that they have indeed been talking to their federal colleagues, and it is true that I was not in this house when the member for Chaffey gave his particular contribution—if it is then a lie, it is a mistake more than a lie. But what I would say is this: the federal colleagues of the member for Hammond and the member for Chaffey must think they are as ineffectual as the rest of South Australia does because, obviously, they did not listen to you in doing what it is that is the right thing to do. I put it squarely on the shoulders—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: Excuse me, you are being disrespectful now and disobeying the Deputy Speaker's rulings. They are just as ineffectual as we think they are because their federal colleagues do not listen to them either.

I am going to finish off where I started. I want to thank the minister for his contribution to regional South Australia, the role that he has played, his forceful advocacy on behalf of the regions, his ability to be able to extract in tight financial times money from cabinet to make sure it is distributed where it should go—and that is to regional South Australia—and for recognising the magnificent contribution that regional South Australia plays in our state. I refute any comments that suggest that we, on this side of the house, do not recognise or support regional South Australia.