Supply Bill 2016

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (15:38): Thank you, Deputy Speaker, and I resume my comments. Previously I have spoken about some of the doom and gloom or the dark clouds hovering over South Australia. However, there are also many opportunities, bright green sprouts, if that is the term they use, but certainly in the South-East there are opportunities that we would like to pursue in partnership with the state government.

Before I get on to those opportunities, I want to talk about a couple of conditions that are affecting more the Upper South-East but certainly the South-East as a region, and I am talking about drought. I call on the state government to do more for drought-stricken farmers in South Australia, and this is on top of the federal government's recent announcement that the funding for rural financial counselling services will continue for the next three years with a $47 million commitment through to 2019. There are areas and farmers in the South-East who really do need this support. There are farmers who have had two years without rain resulting in a 90 per cent crop loss.

If I compare what South Australia is doing compared to Victoria—and the South-East is very close to the Victorian border—it is a stark contrast. What Victoria has done is given a 50 per cent rebate on council rates for farmers affected by severe drought, and also they are working on an $80 million extension of the Wimmera Mallee pipeline connecting drought-stricken farmers in the south-west of Victoria to much-needed water sources.

Meanwhile, across our border, some five kilometres away, our farmers are fighting the same drought with limited assistance. I will note and give credit that the state government did spend $500,000 (half a million dollars) on drought relief measures, but that pales in comparison to the Victorian government's $27 million drought package, which was announced in 2015.

While we are talking about that, the second issue I would like to talk about is co-funding of mobile blackspot phone towers. In the first round, there was $100 million from the commonwealth government. People might be quite surprised to know that I travel 15 minutes outside of Mount Gambier and we are in a dead zone for a good 30 kilometre stretch towards Millicent, and then heading up towards Adelaide there are many more blackspots along the way. I know the state government knows this, but I would implore them to put some money into the next round of blackspot mobile phone towers.

What we will find is that there will be a big uplift in the number of towers in South Australia compared to what we had last time. Just for instance, in the first round of $100 million, we received 11 towers, Tasmania received 31, and Victoria 110. People might think, 'Why the difference? New South Wales received 144.' It has to do with the co-contribution that those governments saw fit to make to this federal government initiative.

We put in no money and got 11 towers. At the other end of the scale, New South Wales put in $24 million and they received 144 towers. Even Tasmania put in $300,000 and tripled the number of towers in South Australia. So, I call on the state government to make a co-contribution to the second round of blackspot mobile phone towers. It is only a $60 million commitment from the federal government this time, as opposed to $100 million, but we have many blackspots in our regional areas that need attention.

Last year, the state government came down to the South-East and held its country cabinet, where a number of issues were raised. Out of that, a very glossy response was tabled. If you took the photos out of it, you would find that it might fit on four or five pages, but nevertheless we have 20 pages, predominantly filled with photos.

I just want to talk about a couple of issues that I would love to see in the upcoming state budget, because it is hampering growth in the South-East. A key issue identified, 'Increased electricity supply will enable industrial expansion in the region.' Well, that is true. You did not need to come down to Mount Gambier. I could have told you that up here. In the response, it quotes:

SA Power Networks has identified some forecast system limitations in the South East region over the 2015-2020 period. To address this, SA Power Networks is investigating a number of solutions...

It does not describe what those solutions are, when they are going to happen and for what regions, so it does make it difficult for our community to forward plan, not knowing where those developments are going to go.

It will come as no surprise to minister Hunter in the other place that we have ongoing concern about the South-East drainage network. For those who do not know, the state government does put in $2.2 million. It costs $8 million a year to properly fund those drainage networks, yet infrastructure is now getting older, more dilapidated and, of course, overgrown, so the drainage network down in the South-East needs an injection of money.

The minister is well aware of this but, to date, has set up a citizens' jury which came back with a very clear message that the state government needs to fund these drainage networks. Of course, unlike the bicycle laws which were implemented, and others that the government agrees with, as soon as they get a determination they do not like, 'We now need to find another way for you the community to fund that extra $6 million.'

Obviously, in terms of community medical services, the health minister's response to Country Health's incompetence—I do not think there is any other word—in finalising contracts for two of our orthopaedic surgeons has been deplorable. These contracts took two years to get in place, past the expiry of the contracts. I know the professionals involved have questioned the advice that the minister is actually getting. It was pleasing for me to see in a written form the minister coming out and questioning some of the advice he has received over the new Royal Adelaide Hospital and the Transforming Health debacle which is unfolding as we speak.

Access to mental health and drug and alcohol services is needed in the region. We saw a great collaboration last Wednesday where the federal government, the state government and the local council cofunded a set of traffic lights, which has been an ongoing burden on our region for 13 years. When all three levels of government come together and work collaboratively, things can happen, and I call on the government to do that with mental health and rehabilitation services for our region.

One of the biggest concerns with this state government response was the key issue of the community being concerned about the prospect of coal seam gas mining in the region. I stand here as the local member saying not one person has come in to my office and not one person has spoken to me about coal seam gas mining. It is certainly not an issue in my region.

However, if they are talking about shale gas mining in the region, then yes, that is a major concern, but the issue I have with this document is they cannot even get their terminology correct. This would have gone through three or four departments, and the issues have been very well documented around shale gas deposits.

I said I would finish on some positive notes for the South-East, and we have lots of opportunities. I was in a meeting last week with the owners of a wood pellet mill. Wood pellets are basically taking the residue out of the forest, all the scrap, grinding it up and pressing it into a hard wooden pellet which is used for commercial and domestic heating. This company has an agreement with the Japanese government for a long period of time to take every wood pellet they can produce.

I have spoken to the Minister for Forests just today about this opportunity for a $100 million to $150 million infrastructure spend in the South-East, which would be fantastic. Biofuel, again, is taking waste from the forests and turning it into a fuel that can be burnt for commercial or domestic electricity purposes and heat. The proponents are doing feasibility studies right now on that.

The biggest opportunity that the South-East has is an upgrade to our airport. This would not only allow us to get freight out of the South-East. Currently, a lot of fresh produce—crayfish, etc.—goes out through Melbourne, either the port of Melbourne or, for non-containerised products, through the port of Portland, which boosts their economic stats but does absolutely nothing for South Australia's economic stats.

An airport upgrade has long been talked about. Plans are in place which have been developed and which would aid tourism opportunities and the market. It would help the South-East, particularly Generations in Jazz, which has interest from Queensland and Sydney to fly students direct to Mount Gambier for the James Morrison Academy. Of course, Generations in Jazz is three weeks away, Deputy Speaker?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Close to my heart, yes; I will be down there.

Mr BELL: Any lobbying you can do, Deputy Speaker, I would be eternally grateful. In terms of a forestry hub, there is good talk around a federal-state collaboration. I think we are starting to get to the theme of this, that we need the state the government to buy-in to these opportunities. If the state government continues to just sit there and say, 'It's the federal government's fault, let's blame the federal government', this state and our regions will go nowhere. Forestry hubs are another example of the great co-contribution which could occur in the South-East.

Lastly, there is a laminating line—taking on the big guys on the eastern seaboard—that would make laminating products for domestic and commercial kitchens, housing operations, that type of stuff. There are proposals to investigate a laminating line at one of our biggest manufacturing plants down there. With that, Deputy Speaker, I conclude my remarks.

Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (15:52): It is my great pleasure to rise and to speak on this important Supply Bill. South Australia is a great place with a great future. I think Adelaide is one of the great cities of the world. I think our regions are second to none. Our people are hard working, they are innovative, they are industrious, and they should be rewarded.

Unfortunately, our state is not travelling as well as it possibly could. The people of South Australia and their opportunity have been let down by a tired, 14-year-old, dysfunctional government, those opposite, who have not put the right policy settings in place to deliver a prosperous future for the people of this state.

By contrast, in recent weeks, Deputy Speaker, you may be aware, I launched 2036, a manifesto for our state, which charts a course back to prosperity for South Australians. We talk about our values, we talk about our principles, our foundation, in nine areas which good government is based upon. We talk about our values, but most importantly we also talk about our reform agenda—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Members are reminded we are to hear the leader in silence—that's both sides of the house. I will have no hesitation in booting people out. I want to hear everything the leader has to say.

Mr MARSHALL: —and those opposite would do well to read 2036. Those opposite would do well in particular to take a look at chapter 1, because in the framing of this year's budget—and let's face it, that is what we are here to talk about today—they need to concentrate on getting the right economic settings in place to chart a course back to prosperity for this state, because, quite frankly, we are not doing well.

We have got stagnant growth in South Australia. We have capital and young people deserting our state. We have our next generation giving up hope and, of course, we have the highest unemployment rate in the entire nation. We have had the highest unemployment rate now for more than 15 months. We have the highest trend unemployment rate, we have the highest seasonally adjusted unemployment rate, we have the highest youth unemployment rate, and, importantly, we have the highest underutilisation rate. Interestingly, I was reading earlier—in that wonderful journal The Adelaide Review—an article by none other than John Spoehr, who does not always reflect my personal belief. However, he has an interesting reflection on underutilisation which I would like to quote. He said:

In any case, we have to face the fact that the situation is much worse than the headline unemployment rate [here in South Australia]…The ABS labour force underutilisation rate provides us with a more complete picture of the health of the labour market. When you take account of underemployment (those who would prefer to work more hours), South Australia has an alarmingly high labour force underutilisation rate of 17 per cent (19 per cent for women)…

This is a full 20 per cent above the national average in South Australia, so things are not going well after 14 years of dysfunctional Labor government. However, all is not lost: 2036 charts a course back to prosperity. In particular, it talks about the economic policy settings that this government needs to get right: tax, regulation, capital investment. They are the three things I would like to talk about as we discuss and debate the Supply Bill in this chamber today.

First, in terms of tax, there is no doubt that we are too highly taxed in South Australia. However, it is not just taxes; it is also, of course, increasing costs, fees, levies and charges which are put onto not only households in South Australia but also the productive component of our economy, the small business sector, the people who are out there putting their lives and capital on the line to create opportunity and employment here in South Australia.

With last year's budget, this time last year when the government was putting the final touches, the fine detail, into its budget, it said it was going to bring down a jobs budget, it was going to bring down a jobs budget for the people of South Australia. It is interesting, because there were a number of measures and we actually supported some of those. There was an attempt at tax reduction; finally, after 14 years, there was an attempt at tax reduction. However, interestingly, this so-called jobs budget (and if ever there was misnomer it was last year's jobs budget) actually provided a downgrading of the employment forecast for South Australia.

In other words not even the government, not even the Treasury modelling, thought that this was actually going to work. When the government first brought down the employment growth rate for this year it said that we were going to grow our economy, grow our employment in this state by 1.75 per cent; by the time it brought down its jobs budget it had diminished to 1 per cent. It had almost halved between the original forecast and the time it brought down its jobs budget to address the unacceptably high unemployment rate in South Australia.

But it gets worse. The Mid-Year Budget Review came out in December, just a few days before Christmas (the government tries to sneak these things out so there is no great scrutiny and observation by the people of South Australia). It brought it out, and guess what happened then? There was a further downgrade to the employment growth rate in South Australia. What was it finally? It was 0.25 of 1 per cent. It is a rounding error. That has been the culmination of this government's poor policy settings.

We have a very high taxation rate in South Australia and we have a very high unemployment rate in South Australia, so you can imagine our alarm, when the budget came down, that the government actually said that rather than reducing payroll tax, the tax on jobs, its plan, on 1 July this year, is to increase payroll tax on small business in this state. It almost beggars belief.

Let me explain this to the chamber. Currently no business in South Australia with a payroll of $1.2 million and below pays payroll tax, not one. On 1 July that threshold goes from $1.2 million down to $600,000. We have the highest unemployment rate in the nation, and we have had this for 15 months, and the government's solution is to jack up the tax on the small business sector. That is how inane this government's taxation regime is.

Of course, there is stamp duty relief, which is factored into the forward estimates, but is it coming for the remainder of this financial year? No. Is it coming next financial year? No. In fact, the next time we will see any stamp duty relief in South Australia is going to be on 1 July 2017. Yet we are in the middle of a dangerous jobs crisis right now and the government's response is, 'Don't worry, in a couple of years' time we are going to do something about it.' Give me a break, and give the people of South Australia a break! What you need to be doing is bringing forward that stamp duty relief now and making sure that we can keep payroll tax lower in South Australia, not jacking it up on 1 July.

Let me also tell you that one of the other big hits to the people of South Australia is this government's sneaky tax, the emergency services levy tax increase that was perpetrated on the people of South Australia without warning after they formed government following the 2014 state general election. This is a massive $360 million dollar hit to households and businesses in South Australia. Again, part of the Liberal Party response outlined in 2036 is to reinstate that rebate and remove that additional tax of the emergency services levy, because that $360 million would be better off in the pockets of ordinary South Australians. It would be better off in the pockets of small business in South Australia, because they will go out and spend money and create sustainable long-term jobs in this state.

What is the government saying about tax? Let me tell you what our Premier is saying about tax at the moment. He has been out quite a bit lately. He has been out offering himself in the national press, and the centrepoint of his taxation policy is to increase the GST. His idea to increase employment here in South Australia is to suck $3 billion out of our domestic economy each and every year going forward. That is his tax plan. He has taken it to the people of South Australia. He has taken it to the people of Australia at every single opportunity. He wants to tax the people of South Australia an additional $3 billion per year.

Of course, he was castigated by his own federal counterpart, Nick Champion, who went out there and said that this would be an absolute disaster. Let me tell you, federal ALP criticism of this government is coming thick and fast at the moment, because they know that this is not a good government whatsoever. We should not be talking about increasing taxes; we should be talking about reducing taxes in South Australia, and reducing the costs on families and businesses here in this state.

That is why again, with our positive plan outlined after we launched our foundation 2036 document, it was the Liberal Party which went out and said that we would put a cap on council rates in South Australia. Why? Why do we want to do this? I will tell you why. Because the Liberal Party believes that by lowering costs on the productive component of the economy, by lowering costs on families, we will stimulate economic activity and we will create long-term sustainable jobs. The Liberal reform agenda works and the government would do well to read chapter 1 of 2036.

One of the other important things which is covered off in our manifesto about growing the size of our economy is deregulation. This is not in the DNA of those opposite. They love to regulate; they love red tape. They love to introduce more rules and costs on business, but it is not actually working. That is why the Liberal Party said, in our manifesto, that we would establish the first state-based productivity commission, not to trim red tape, but to actually deregulate in South Australia.

This is what we believe in. We need to pull away that costly regulation that costs jobs, especially at this time of very high unemployment. Again, that is why we have been out there, in contrast to the Labor Party, releasing our positive plan for deregulation in South Australia. That is why, only a few weeks ago, it was the Liberal Party that went out and said that we need to have a different set of rules regarding the adaptive re-use of some of our older buildings in South Australia.

I was delighted when the government said, 'Yes, we support that and we will support that.' That is a good response, because we want to deregulate. That is why we were out there saying that we would like to deregulate ride sharing here in South Australia. At the moment it is completely illegal. It operates in 400 cities around the world, but Labor in South Australia knows better. They think that this should be a highly regulated area. We came out, after the publication of our very positive 2036 foundation and said that we should deregulate this area; we should allow people to have choice. We should create jobs in South Australia. We went out with it. I commend the government. They have now said that they will move to allow ride sharing to be legal in South Australia.

But let's take a look at the way they go about doing it. Their first course is to increase fares and increase levies on consumers and operators in South Australia. This is before we even know what the impact on the taxi industry is going to be. This is before we even know whether Uber is going to come into the market. The first point and the default point of Labor as per usual is to increase taxes, increase costs, increase regulation, and that is what is strangling our economy in South Australia.

The third area that this government needs to focus on is capital investment. We are at a time of extraordinarily high unemployment in South Australia. Simultaneous with that, the government is massively slashing their capital investment budget in South Australia. It is almost impossible to believe, but it is a fact. I have some stats here for you, Deputy Speaker, because I know that you like numbers; you are a very numerate person, one of few on that side of the house.

In 2009-10, the state government's budget for capital investment was $2.1 billion. It went up in 2010-11 to almost $2.3 billion. In 2011-12, $2.1 billion, and in 2012-13, $2.1 billion. You are starting to see the picture: we have had capital investment in South Australia well above the $2 billion mark on an annual basis for an extended period of time. When the unemployment rate started going through the roof, what was the government's response? 'Let's cut back on capital investment. Let's cut back on the sort of thing that would create productive infrastructure in this state, which would create long-term sustainable jobs.'

In the 2014-15 year, the budget went down to $1.2 billion, so it went down. When the budget came out this year, the Treasurer, after sustained attack from those of us on this side who said, 'What are you doing? At a time of high unemployment and extraordinarily low interest rates, surely now is the time for some of the productive infrastructure that we need here in this state. You are not out there competing with the private sector now.'

Mr van Holst Pellekaan: Never cost less.

Mr MARSHALL: As the member for Stuart says, it would never cost less than what it is right now. The government's response was to say, 'We won't let it go below $1.3 billion.' 'We won't let it go below $1.3 billion'? This is a 40 per cent reduction on where it had been over the previous five years, but they would not let it go below $1.3 billion. Of course, when the Mid-Year Budget Review came down, that promise went out the door as well, because they cut their capital expenditure budget by a further $85 million. This is the ineptitude of this government. I think what it does is highlight the difference between those of us on this side of the chamber and those of us on that side of the chamber.

On this side of the chamber, we believe in lowering costs and lowering taxes on business. We believe in reducing regulation and we believe in investing in long-range productive infrastructure for our state. Those opposite increase taxes, increase charges, increase fees, increase the regulation and, at a time when we need it most, cut back on capital expenditure. It is impossible to believe, but that is the situation. The culmination is where we are at the moment, when our next generation is really struggling to see a future in this state.

The National Australia Bank Monthly Business Survey was published yesterday. South Australia is identified as having the lowest-ranked business conditions in the nation. Is anybody surprised? It is hardly even reported, because month after month, quarter after quarter, it is the same situation. Last week, the Sensis Business Index came out: lowest-ranked small business confidence and conditions in the nation again. This is the problem for South Australia: the confidence level is at an all-time low.

Not only should those opposite be reading the very important and informative chapter 1 of our 2036 document but they should also take a look at chapter 9. Chapter 9 deals very specifically with some very important areas, called 'Running an efficient and stable government'. Let me tell you, running an efficient and stable government has been well beyond the capacity of this government for an extended period of time. We are laying out our reform agenda in all its colourful glory (81 pages) for those opposite to read and adopt if they wish, and 9.4 is important, because we do need to be fiscally responsible. I will just read two small parts of this for you this afternoon, Deputy Speaker:

While balancing the budget should always be a top government priority, we also believe that debt can be a useful tool for improving prosperity when it is used for investment in productive assets, which will create jobs and grow South Australia's economy.

Another small section states:

The State Liberals will balance the State Budget to ensure taxpayers' money is being spent on the things that matter to everyday South Australians, while reducing the State's debt over the long term.

Ms Redmond interjecting:

Mr MARSHALL: That is 9.4, which is one of my favourite areas of the overall document. We do need to live within our means in South Australia, that is a fact, but when you look at the budget that we have going forward it provides, at the moment, for a surplus. A lot of that surplus has not been dealt to the pages by a prudent government, it has been, essentially, delivered with this massive windfall gain which is GST to the state.

Let me just remind you that the GST which is coming into the state this year, over last year, goes up well in excess of half a billion dollars. In fact, we have just had the latest Commonwealth Grants Commission update that next year our GST is going to go up by a further half a billion dollars. So, in the last two years we have seen the annual increase in unencumbered GST dollars into the state go up by a billion dollars.

We say: yes, we do need to deliver surplus budgets, but they do not need to be massive surplus budgets at this time when we have the highest unemployment rate in the nation. We need to balance the need for prudence, in terms of our financial management, with the needs of South Australians. At the moment, they are giving up hope, but there is hope: 2036 charts a very positive course towards our bicentenary in South Australia, but action on it cannot start in 2030 or 2032, it needs to start right now, it needs to start with a budget that is going to be handed down in June, and it needs to start by the putting in place of economic policy settings which are going to drive long-term prosperity and, importantly, sustainable jobs growth in this state.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Davenport is looking at me, and the others leave the chamber.

Mr DULUK (Davenport) (16:12): They are all leaving. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I do notice you were looking to the other side for a contribution, perhaps, before, and I thank you for looking at me. One thing that has caught my attention in the 12 or so months that I have been in this house is that, when it comes to matters of supply and financial matters, we barely get a contribution from those opposite.

Those opposite make wonderful contributions on many matters, and I look at the member for Ashford, who is here right now, who always makes very good contributions on a lot of social issues, as does the member for Hammond, but the collective government and their members when it comes to matters of supply (bills related to supply) you barely hear a squeak. You have to ask yourself: why is that? The reality is that they are embarrassed by their 14-year record; they are embarrassed by their financial record; they are embarrassed about the way the state is going at the moment; they are embarrassed by the highest unemployment in the land; and they are embarrassed about the peak debt.

The Supply Bill is critical to the machine of parliament. In the absence of supply, of course, there would be no parliamentary authority for budget expenditure. That is why we on this side do not oppose the request for another $3.444 billion to be transferred from the consolidated account of the Public Service, but I do want to make some comments about the government's fiscal performance.

Almost a year ago, I spoke on the very same bill. At that time, the government sought $3.2 billion from consolidated accounts and I spoke then, as I will now, on the government's fiscal performance. What is a very stark and frightening thing for all South Australians is that little has changed in 12 months. The comments I made last year are still applicable today, almost verbatim, and I feel like inserting them into Hansard like many on the other side, but I will not.

In the last 12 months, the government has not made any definitive improvements to the economic conditions of South Australia; that is in 12 months, but of course this is what we have come to expect after 14 years of state Labor. This government has had plenty of time and plenty of opportunities to deliver improved outcomes for South Australians. It has been 14 years of tired, hard Labor. The people of South Australia want to know, what does their government do all day, and what is their government doing to turn around the fortunes of this state.

We consistently hear from the Premier about the precarious position of this state, the need to be patient as we transition from the old economy to the new economy, and Mr Premier, we wait. We saw the announcement yesterday about the Labor government embracing ride sharing in South Australia which is, of course, a position that moves us to a new economy, but only on the back of the work of the Liberal opposition in this area. The Liberal Party, in this last 12 months, as we head into the halfway mark of the term, is driving the agenda. We are the ones who are transitioning and forcing the government to follow us to come into the new economy and get out of the old economy.

So I ask the Premier these questions: when will we actually start turning the corner? When will we see a move to the new economy? When will we see the creation of jobs and a declining unemployment rate, which is, of course, the most important thing we should all strive to be doing. When will we see an improvement to the cost of living for households, and when will we see a change in the state's balance sheet?

The Commonwealth Bank State of the States report published in January 2015, ranked South Australian seventh on economic performance out of eight states and territories. In 2016, a full 12 months later, lo and behold, we are still in seventh spot. Not much to show for that 12 months, and the state also now ranks seventh on retail trade and eighth on dwelling starts; and, of course, we know that dwelling starts and housing construction are strong lead indicators of economic performance.

The state's unemployment rate continues to remain too high. The SA Regional Labour Force Data for the year ending February 2016, reports that the unemployment rate of 7.3 per cent remains unchanged since February 2015; so in 12 months, no change to unemployment. The number of unemployed has increased in this 12-month period from 62,600 to 64,100, and the unemployment rate amongst 15 to 24-year-olds has increased from 14.9 per cent to 15.4 per cent.

One thing that these stats do not show is the amount of people, and the amount of young South Australians who are not looking for work, and, of course, the amount of people and young South Australians who have left the state because they cannot find work. They are not even in these statistics. Our unemployment rate is the worst in the nation and we should be ashamed at this and we should all be doing all that we can to revert these figures.

We have the highest unemployment, youth unemployment and underemployment rates in the nation, and the outlook does not make for good viewing. Each week, South Australians open their morning papers or turn on the evening news and learn of more job losses. Since 2013, the state has been hit with job loss announcements at Holden, Arnott's Biscuits, Aldinga Turkeys, ACI, Caroma Industries, Arrium, BHP, United Dairy Power, Fairfax Media, Unibooks, Santos, and the list goes on, and that only incudes the big name industries.

Of course, there are plenty of mum and dad small businesses and local operators, and Jim's Mowing franchise owners who are all going out of business in this state, mainly as a result of loss of confidence in the market. As unemployment grows, households are also being hit with extraordinary increases in cost of living pressures. Last year, I noted that utilities in South Australia had become some of the most costly in the world, with water prices rising 227 per cent since 2002. Twelve months later—and we are working on this 12-month cycle—the only thing that has changed is how much water prices have increased since 2002, not decreased.

The last figures show that South Australia's average water bill has now grown 241 per cent between 2002-03 and 2015-16. Not only has the Labor government overseen the highest rate of unemployment in a decade, their tenure has resulted in some of the highest utility prices in the world. South Australia also has the most expensive power in the National Electricity Market, and I think the member for Schubert alluded to these points yesterday in his contribution about how in some areas government policy has deliberately spiked up the price of power for South Australians. In February this year the Australian Energy Market Operator released data showing surging electricity prices in South Australia for the next two years.

Increasing utility prices is particularly bad news for the state's job market and makes our manufacturing and manufacturers less competitive. Business looking to invest in new job-creating opportunities in Australia look elsewhere due to the high cost of doing business in our state, and existing businesses are struggling to survive. Hit with a triple blow of massive increases in the emergency services levy, exorbitant water prices and the crippling electricity prices they just cannot survive in the current market.

Of course, as we know, from 1 July this year small businesses will be paying payroll tax from the new threshold of $600,000. The supply chain costs that our businesses face mean that their ability to compete nationally and internationally is severely hamstrung by this government, and I urge those opposite and those who are in charge of the Treasury benches to do all they can to relieve these cost pressures on our businesses to do their bit to help our manufacturing base which is so dear and near to so many of us.

It is little wonder that business confidence in South Australia continues to decline. BankSA's latest State Monitor survey, published on 3 March 2016, shows that business confidence recorded a 5.3 points drop since the last survey was conducted in October. The news was worse in our rural regions where business confidence fell 8.1 points. The subdued outlook amongst South Australian business owners constrains investments and limits willingness to hire more staff, and all this feeds into the growing unemployment, and, of course, the growing unemployment feeds into an issue of tax receipts for the state and that then cripples the ability of the state to provide services to the public.

The time for action is now. There is an opportunity for this government to heed some of the advice that the Liberal Party on this side has been talking about now for quite some time. There is an opportunity to create jobs, and we must encourage businesses to invest their economic potential, but to achieve this we need an active and industrious government. We need a government willing to make the tough decisions, we need a government willing to listen and to respond. South Australia's small business sector remains a significant driver of South Australia's productivity.

Improving operating conditions for these businesses is critical and, as a start, we should be lowering taxes and a reduction of red tape is essential. The Treasurer must extend the payroll tax rebate for small businesses, and the major infrastructure investment must be forthcoming to soak up job losses and, dare I say, use of steel from Arrium.

We need a government with a vision, and that is why the state Liberals have released its 2036 document. It is a wonderful document and, of course, one that I do urge those opposite to read, because 2036, of course, is more than a date: it is a destination. It is a message to South Australians letting them know that there is a better way, a Liberal way.

But, of course, amongst all of this is we do have a problem, and for too long this Labor government has been running budget deficits, putting further pressure on state debt. Total non-public sector debt will reach $10.5 billion in 2015-16 and is expected to peak at $13.5 billion once the new Royal Adelaide Hospital comes on line.

This high debt means, of course, increasing interest payments by this government, and at the moment we are paying $520 million in interest on total non-financial public sector debt in 2015-16. That is more than $1.4 million of taxpayer money paid each and every day in interest—$1.4 million daily is paid in interest. And, of course, this high debt means that there is an opportunity cost—the opportunity cost of not being able to invest, invest in services, invest in infrastructure and invest in jobs. If this government cannot live within its means and run a continued budget surplus over the cycle then state debt will continue to grow with little to show for that debt, and that is the scourge that we leave to the next generations.

Of course, this is an opportunity in this bill to talk about matters of supply and what has and has not been done. I come to some issues in my local electorate, and they really fit around the government failing to deliver critical infrastructure projects. The second edition of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure's Road Management Plan released in February 2015 states:

Main Road, Blackwood is an important arterial route through residential and commercial areas and serves a number of key roles. It provides a key road link for residents of Belair, Glenalta and Blackwood. In particular, the road forms an important commuter link between the Adelaide Hills within the Mitcham area and the Adelaide Plains, including the Adelaide CBD. Additionally, the road links to other suburbs and townships within the southern Adelaide Hills.

Two-way average annual daily traffic volumes on Main Road vary from 20,400 vehicles within the commercial precinct to 17,300 along the northern sections of Main Road, with the exception of the first section near Belair Road, which accounts for about 6,000 vehicles.

Despite these findings and recommendations of the Road Management Plan, first released in 2006, the government has failed to make a genuine infrastructure investment in Main Road or any other Mitcham Hills traffic corridors identified in the plan. Since 2006, DPTI has delivered only speed limit reductions to 50 km/h, some new bicycle lanes and upgraded bicycle infrastructure (dare I say, painted lines), a new pedestrian crossing near Russell Street in Belair, two pedestrian refuges, upgraded and new midblock treatment, and some upgrades to intersections along the study corridor. This is a very short list of projects over a 10-year period, and the project list is, of course, short on substantive funding.

In fact, this government has failed to allocate funding to any of the major projects outlined in the Road Management Plan, including, of course, the Blackwood roundabout, which many residents in my area, and of course in the member for Fisher's area as well, know is a piece of infrastructure that well and truly needs to be invested in. The Blackwood roundabout is considered one of the worst in Adelaide. The Road Management Plan notes that there were 48 reported crashes, including six casualties, on the roundabout to the year ending 2014.

Whilst the number of crashes has declined following the speed limit being reduced from 60 km/h to 50 km/h, the Blackwood roundabout is still over-represented in crash statistics. The Road Management Plan reports that all unsignalised intersections within the Adelaide metropolitan area are ranked based on the number of casualty crashes that have occurred in the last five years. Blackwood roundabout is ranked at 10^th as an intersection, let alone as a roundabout.

The Blackwood roundabout, in conjunction with Main Road, is long overdue for government investment. Mitcham Hills residents and the residents of Davenport deserve better. They deserve a government that will respond to the needs to the community and deliver infrastructure projects that increase safety, decrease risks and improve traffic flows. South Australians deserve infrastructure projects that deliver community-wide benefits. South Australians deserve to be listened to, not continually force fed projects that receive significant community opposition.

This government, as we know, does not listen. It has not listened to the community in so many areas, and of course the Blackwood roundabout and funding for roads in my area are other areas where the government has failed to listen. In this speech I will not even go into the government failing to listen to the community in regard to Transforming Health and, of course, the closure of the Repat. Despite the tabling of the largest ever petition in parliament which opposed the closure of the Repat, the government continues to stubbornly ignore the wishes of South Australians on so many fronts.

I have no doubt that the Liberal Party, when in government, will listen to the people. After 14 years of Labor, we have been listening and we have been hearing. We will listen and we will deliver projects that the community wants and projects that the community actually needs. We will fund, of course, the $20 million for the first stage of the Mitcham Hills road corridor upgrade and improve road safety to reduce peak-hour bottlenecks. We will reverse the government's $90 million ESL grab. We will not close metropolitan hospitals.

We are here and we will do all that we can to reduce costs of living to ensure that families and households can meet their bills. We will do all that we can to support small businesses, as we know they are the drivers of our economy. We are committed to creating jobs by investing in South Australia, and we are committed to reducing, of course, the cost of living for our households.

I will finish with those remarks, but it is time for this government to step up and deliver on its rhetoric of a vision that actually fulfils its commitment to a five-year strategy, which it has, of course, across all its portfolio areas, and there are many. It is time for them to really look back and say to themselves, 'Are we doing the best job that we can?' Many in the community say, 'No, they are not.'

Ms DIGANCE (Elder) (16:29): I think we have had an interesting time listening to many speeches today, and I would just like to remind the house of the power of language and the influence it has on thought and action. When we decide to speak in a certain way, it influences our actions and our thoughts. No surprise, I will be speaking in support of the Supply Bill, and I will confirm the progress and the work and commitment by our state government in this state.

Through these challenging times of changing economics and business, and the models that we find ourselves navigating our way through, situations that we are ultimately being confronted with see us joining together in South Australia to work together to find solutions through these somewhat difficult and challenging times. I have noted with interest that many of the speeches from those opposite have been a good avenue to blame government for perhaps lack of action and lack of commitment, but can I say I work quite closely with the small business community in my area and I engage with them on a one-on-one basis through various forums.

From a recent meeting I had with them came the comments from all of them that it is actually a shared responsibility to progress South Australia, to progress the economy and to progress business, so they did not see that it was just for the government to be doing this. It was not our role alone: it was something for government, business and the general broader community to join together in to progress this wonderful state. As one of them said to me at this business meeting, 'I am South Australian through and through, and I am committed to ensuring that this state succeeds not just for me but for generations to come.' I think that is a very important point to make.

For today's purpose though, I am going to wholeheartedly focus on some significant and important achievements that have occurred in my particular electorate. All of these achievements are based on community building—community building activities in which the state government has joined in partnership, in the main, with local council to bring to the community those particular projects that the community are really wishing to have in their area.

There have been a number of these, and these particular activities, in recognition of building community, build both a civil and well-functioning society and create a network of understanding, a network of interaction and tolerance, and positive activity and positive change. I think that is what we really need to focus on. It is very easy in challenging times to focus on the negative, and that is human nature, but to rise above that and focus on the positive and focus on what we can actually achieve by pulling together is certainly a highly-evolved attribute that we need to cultivate.

I will highlight the financial partnerships and also commitment by the state government in a number of the outdoor spaces and a significant festival now heading towards its third year, early next year. The degree to which the City of Marion engages with the community is exceptional and is demonstrated through the council commitment to engage and empower the community and take them along for the journey, along with the story.

One such project has been the Edwardstown play space and courts. Over a period of time, we have seen next to the Edwardstown football oval, which also has the only outdoor velodrome accessible to anyone who wishes to use it, some dilapidated courts and a rundown play space. Over time, I have campaigned with the people in the area to ensure that we renew those courts and renew that play space.

With the contribution from the government, not so long ago the mayor and I opened the tennis courts, which also double as basketball courts and can be used for soccer. Next to them, there is a wonderful play space that has what is called a 'natural play space'. The children can come along and play in the water with a water pump. They can play in the sand, and it is really interactive with snakes and ladders, balance beams and climbing frames. There is a chalkboard, which is a wall that people can write on, and chalk is supplied for them to write with. Co-located next to that is a barbecue area and a shelter. This area has become so popular—because I quite often stop to say hello to people who are using it—that word has travelled. People are coming from the Hills to use this play area. It is a wonderful addition and regeneration of that space.

Another area that is really worthy of mention is a part of my electorate that did not have any community park for quite some distance, and generally people could not even walk to one, particularly the aged. Over time, the council has, with a commitment from the government, set about purchasing a number of housing blocks, and now we see the Jervois Street Reserve Community Park taking shape.

I was at the sod turning for that just recently, which was an amazing event, with community people turning out and celebrating the fact that this land was going to be transformed—and is being transformed as we speak—with the community also having their input right down to children in reception and a childcare centre that are co-located not far from this area.

It is an amazing vision to see what will take place in this area. It will not just be a park. It will have an oval, some quiet places, a bike track, swing areas, nature play, a water pump, and sand play. It will have somewhere for older people to play drafts, checkers or something like that, where a table will be set up as well, and there will be a barbecue area. It has been well received by the local community and something that has been sadly lacking for some time. It is positive news, and good news is on the horizon. I am looking forward to its opening in the near future.

Another open space, which is highly valued in my electorate and very visionary on behalf of the council, is the skate park. Our state government delivered close to $1 million in support of this skate park in recognition that bringing together people of all ages is such an important thing to do. It is co-located next to the Oaklands wetland, an area that is a recreational plaza.

It is a place where people can come with skateboards, BMX bikes and scooters, and there are obstacle courses and a mini basketball court, and next to it are grassed areas and seating. It is an area that attracts all ages. It encourages people to exercise and talk together and interact with each other. On Thursday nights a youth community group holds a sausage sizzle and they talk to the youth and interact with them on that particular dimension as well.

The value of the investment in this area cannot be underestimated. It acknowledges that these open spaces are of such importance to create community, cohesion and positivity and to create a sense of well being of being outdoors and they also support people's health.

Just to diverge a bit from these open spaces, I want to focus now on what has been well received in our community, and that is the Al Salam Festival, also known as the Peace Festival. The Al Salam Festival had its origin through the Islamic Society of South Australia, which is a group based at the Park Holme mosque in my area.

I was very humbled by a suggestion they made a number of years ago. They wanted to bring together people from Muslim and non-Muslim backgrounds in a safe option, where non-Muslims can ask Muslims about how they do things, why they do things, why they dress like they dress, why they have certain customs. I certainly was a huge supporter of this.

We saw (and I am sure that many of you have attended) the inaugural festival last year and the second one at the beginning of this year. This has been so well received in our state, where we value the richness of multiculturalism and the energy and dynamism that it brings to the state. I thank the state government for the support it gives to this group, and the ongoing commitment it gave when it started out with the inaugural Al Salam Festival just over 18 months ago, of over $15,000 per annum over three years, taking them up to 2018.

I am sure we will see that this festival will endure for years and years to come. It has been a real privilege to be involved so intimately with this particular group, as they work through assimilating themselves—and that is what they want to do. They just want to live in harmony and peace with the rest of us here in South Australia. I commend them for their work.

Just as an aside, the other thing this group does is they have a drive where, for a week or so, they will actually invite their neighbours—who they do not necessarily know and who may be non-Muslim—in for dinner. That has been a really successful program as well. I think they are a wonderful, marvellous group with a lot of energy.

We have heard a lot, from the other side, about the state government not investing in or turning a blind eye, or whatever you want to say, to South Australia. I do not think we can go past what has happened at the Tonsley precinct, the old Mitsubishi site. The state government is transforming Tonsley into Australia's first innovative district, helping to create a vibrant, diverse and internationally competitive economy for our state.

Tonsley's industry-attraction efforts are focused on high-value manufacturing businesses across four key sectors: mining and resources; clean technologies, including sustainable building products and services; renewable energy; and health and medical technology and assistive devices in software and simulation. It is an incredible place to go and visit, and I suggest to those of you who have not been that you do yourselves a favour and go down and have a look.

There is Flinders University campus, which is very active and has the New Venture Institute in there, and there is the TAFE campus as well, with all sorts of things going on there. It is an incredible sight to see, and I think it has really gathered momentum and is still gathering momentum. We recently saw the opening of the state drill core library there, a well-renowned facility that people in mining and geology highly value, and access either online (from what is available online) or book to go through to look at particular core samples of South Australia's geological findings that have been kept over the years. It is an incredible precinct. It is visionary, and I think it is something all of us in South Australia should be very proud of.

Finally, I think that small business really is a driver of South Australia. Small to medium-sized business is something we need to value, and we do value and support it. I spend a significant amount of time speaking to people in small business supporting them, talking them through things, listening to their stories—and there are so many good news stories in the small business sector. This is what we need to focus on, those that are actually achieving really good things, and look at how they can then support other people in small business to achieve as well.

There are many of those people with that energy who are already doing this, and who want to do this. To name just a few in my area, there is ec.group, the only carpet manufacturer in South Australia. It is a growing business and is to be commended. We also have MIMP, a communications company, which is growing and doing amazing things connecting people in the outback. It is incredible work it is doing. There is also a company called Silver Fleece which sources Australian wool and is about to start manufacture (just as one example) of the Australian test cricket team jumpers—a huge achievement for South Australia.

So I say to those of you who want to speak negatively about South Australia and what is happening here, you need to have a bit of a hard look at what you are saying when you talk about this. The types of words you speak can be quite damning and negative, and we need to be talking up all the people who are doing really good things in this state. As leaders, we need to make sure we get that message across, that we are there, we are supporting them and with them. Certainly things can be tough, but we can do this.

It is not about one group of people or one person or government, it is about everyone getting together—and it is not just me saying that, that is being said by people in the community. With that, I support the bill.

Mr WINGARD (Mitchell) (16:44): I rise today to speak on the Supply Bill, as we do each year, preceding the announcement of the state government's budget proposal. The government is asking for $3.44 billion to ensure it can pay the bills until the budget is passed. Sadly, I believe the state Labor government has not spent South Australian taxpayers' money wisely in the past, and sadly, the results are showing in poor performances on the national stage.

Speaking on the Supply Bill gives me the opportunity to talk about our positive plan to lift South Australia off the bottom of the ladder, a position SA finds itself in after 14 years of a state Labor government. Earlier today I spoke as an old scholar at Brighton Secondary School about leadership. I stated that I believe that to take a leadership role you must first and foremost care. You must care for the community, care for the team or care for the group that you want to lead. That is why I am here. I care and I want to help my community and our state off the bottom of the ladder and into a more prosperous position.

I also spoke to the students about creating a vision when you are in a leadership position. That means establishing a connection and communicating with your community team or group, and communicating begins with listening. I have spent a lot of time listening to my community. That is why I am proud to have had a significant input into the vision our party has launched. Our 2036 vision document is available online, and I encourage all South Australians to read it.

I went on to tell the students at Brighton Secondary School that communication does not end with listening. You then need to take people on the journey you have envisaged, and that is what we as a party, behind our leader, Steven Marshall, are doing with the 2036 document. Our values and beliefs are outlined in 2036, and our policies for building a better South Australia are being hung from the framework of this 2036 document.

I will talk a little bit more about some of the policies and visions that we have already released shortly, but I also want to touch on why we have got to this point, that South Australia sits at the bottom of the table, and why we need a Marshall Liberal government to take us forward. While I do not want to be negative, there are a few unavoidable points that must be made.

I mentioned being a leader and that firstly to be a leader you must care for your community and then you must communicate, which starts with listening. My community has made it clear to me, as I have listened to them, that what they want the most is opportunity. They do not want handouts, they do not want to be carried; they want the opportunity to stand on their own two feet and be the master of their own destiny. This begins with a job. The first line in the Marshall Liberal team's 2036 manifesto to all South Australians states: 'We believe you deserve every opportunity to have a stable job in a growing economy.'

So where has the Weatherill Labor government placed us on that front? We are at the bottom of the national unemployment table. South Australia has cemented itself at the bottom of the ladder when it comes to unemployment over the past few years. We have been battling it out for quite a while with Tasmania, and our results have been incredibly poor. We have the highest unemployment rate of any state in the nation and the highest underemployment rate of any state in the nation.

Underemployment is important in this context, because underemployment talks about the people who want to work more, but cannot. You are deemed to be employed if you work one hour a week. We have people out there who are working a couple of hours a week, one hour a week, whatever it may be, but they want more. That is underemployment, and we have the highest underemployment rate in the nation. Sadly, I must add that we have the highest youth unemployment rate in the nation as well.

Last month, our unemployment rates skyrocketed from 6.8 per cent to 7.7 per cent, to be the highest in the nation. It is just unacceptable. As we break it down a little bit more, last month, in the figures for February, the unemployment rate in Adelaide Central and Hills went from 6.4 per cent in January to 6.8 per cent, in Adelaide North we went up from 8.9 per cent to 10.2 per cent, in Adelaide South we went from 7.1 to 8.4 per cent (and, of course, I have a great interest in Adelaide South), and in the South-East we went from 6.5 per cent to 7.1 per cent.

We now have almost 70,000 South Australians unemployed and looking for work. South Australia's unemployment rate skyrocketed, as I have pointed out, in February, and it really sent a shudder through our state. As we look further around the state and to the regions, sadly, the news there is quite grim as well, and in Port Pirie in particular. Over the last five years, the unemployment rate has risen from 5 per cent to 12.9 per cent, which includes a 2 per cent jump in the last 12 months.

Port Pirie has an unemployment rate of 12.9 per cent. That is the highest rate of any South Australian region, almost three percentage points higher than the Murraylands and more than three times the unemployment rate of Port Lincoln and Ceduna. The Weatherill Labor government just is not doing enough and people are questioning the local member, the Minister for Regional Development, when it comes to this high unemployment rate as well. If you look at the graph over the journey, the unemployment rate at Port Pirie is growing higher and higher, and it is alarming.

I mentioned before South Australia's triple whammy: the unenviable position of having the highest unemployment rate, the highest youth unemployment rate and the highest underemployment rate. There is also a concern out there, as we look at the ABS stats, that in South Australia, because of our poor performance when it comes to employment, people are giving up looking for work because it is proving just too hard in South Australia. When you have figures that point in that direction, you know things are not as they should be.

I mentioned youth unemployment, and this is something dear to my heart. I fear for the young people of South Australia who want to stay living in South Australia and want opportunities in South Australia, but they are just not being presented with them. The youth unemployment rate in January 2016 was 16.2 per cent. It is alarming when we know what is on the horizon: we know there are tough times in Whyalla with Arrium at present, Holden's closure is coming, and just yesterday 180 jobs went from Optus.

This government has failed to diversify and it has failed to create opportunities for the people of South Australia to gain work. When we look at where job opportunities come from, they come from business. Just recently, the Sensis Business Index put out its quarterly survey of 1,000 small and medium businesses, and South Australia was in a very poor state. Forty-five per cent of businesses think the economy is slowing compared to just 6 per cent that believe the economy is growing.

The member for Elder talked about being positive, and I am all about being positive and supporting businesses that are keeping their head above water, making a go of it and trying their hardest. I am there supporting them, but when these figures come back and say that 45 per cent of businesses in South Australia think the economy is slowing and just 6 per cent believe that the economy is growing, you cannot hide from the stats. Confidence amongst the Adelaide business survey plummeted 14 points in the March quarter to end at +1, way behind the national average of +35. Again, South Australia is lagging in the key indicator that is there to grow jobs for this state.

South Australia's jobs crisis lies at the heart of these worrying figures. I will talk more about the Marshall Liberal team's 2036 document, but the plan there is to immediately cut business taxes to allow business to grow and create more jobs, invest in new job-creating infrastructure projects and provide immediate relief to families and households who are struggling under spiralling cost-of-living pressures, which includes the ESL that I will talk more about later.

Jobs are a real worry, there is no denying that. The figures and the facts provided by the ABS and the Sensis Business Index that I talked about when it comes to business confidence in South Australia indicate that we are not in a good way. They are just the facts and there is no hiding from the facts.

Recently, the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies released a report at the Adelaide University, an economics issues paper. This is another great concern of mine, because we talk about the problem with jobs in South Australia, again having the highest unemployment rate in the nation, the highest underemployment rate and the highest youth unemployment rate, sitting at the bottom of the table. We have been dwelling at the bottom of the table for months and months, and well over a year or two now, along with Tasmania, and not finding a way forward.

We have now had the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies release this paper, and they described a concern that I have, and that is South Australia's population exodus. They described it as a 'State Bank-style population exodus'. We all remember what happened with the State Bank and we all know what happened to South Australia afterwards: people took off because opportunities were all on the eastern seaboard. Further in this report, the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that SA is losing more than 3,000 people interstate per year on average since 2005-06, with its population growth in the slowest of the states on the mainland. South Australia's population grew by 350,000 (almost 27 per cent); less than Victoria, which was 46 per cent, and less than half the rate of the nation as a whole, which was 55 per cent. So, we really have some issues on this front as well.

Young people are leaving South Australia to find more opportunity interstate because it is not being provided here. It is pointed out in this report that young people are leaving South Australia and they say it is the failure of the state government to address the important issue which is severely hurting the state's economy. Jobs are the key to this. We need to do more to improve the unemployment issue in South Australia, to grow more jobs and create more opportunities for our young people. That is why, in our 2036 plan, we have earmarked innovation and the supporting of small start-up businesses as the key to growing jobs in the future.

Those numbers are disappointing, and I know they hurt all of us in this chamber, but the disappointing thing for me is, after 14 years of Labor, nothing is happening, nothing is changing and we are still stuck at the bottom of the ladder and have been there for quite a while. While I do not have time to go through all nine chapters of the 2036 document, I do want to skip forward to health. The first point of chapter 3 of the Marshall Liberal team's 2036 manifesto to all South Australians states:

We believe you are entitled to world-class, accessible and effective health care which supports your health and wellbeing.

So, where has the Weatherill Labor government taken us on their Transforming Health agenda? Let us just have a look through a few things here because, like our unemployment figure and like our jobless rate, this government has really disappointed all of South Australia.

If we look at the Noarlunga Hospital first, we know that 29 beds will be closed in June of this year as part of the Transforming Health plan. Closure of Noarlunga's medical ward will mean that anyone needing to stay for medical reasons will be transferred to the Flinders Medical Centre, which will get just 16 beds. So, 29 beds at Noarlunga will turn into 16 beds at Flinders. You do the math. That does not stack up. Concerns for the people of the south; concerns for people who use the Noarlunga Hospital.

The Repat is another grave concern for all South Australians. A petition has been tabled in this parliament, and a bigger petition has never been seen by this parliament. The closure of the Repat would see the loss of significant expertise in ageing and veteran's health, including the delivery of the PTSD service Ward 17 (the post traumatic stress disorder ward). The Weatherill government's current plan to rebuild Ward 17 at Glenside is a downgrade of the services offered.

Ninety per cent of the Repat's patients are community patients. Closure of the Repat would have serious negative long-term impacts for the health of the community. Adelaide's public hospital system is already overstretched, particularly at the Flinders Medical Centre—as I said, there are issues there with Noarlunga shuffling more patients to Flinders, so increased pressure added to Flinders—and it will not be able to absorb the Repat's current workload as well.

The net loss at the Repat is 160 hospital beds and 170,000 outpatient attendances per annum. Two thousand transfers from the Flinders Medical Centre each year go to the Repat and 25 per cent of orthopaedic and urological elective surgeries performed in Adelaide's public hospital system are done at the Repat. There have been no announcements of the future locations of many of the Repat's specialist services, including orthopaedics, ophthalmology, urology, and others, and it really is disappointing. Closing the Repat means abandoning $46 million worth of capital works at the hospital in the past 13 years.

The crisis in Transforming Health just continues. We know the federal Labor president, Mark Butler, came out and attacked the state's Transforming Health policy and was very scathing of what is happening within Transforming Health. That is the president of the Labor Party attacking his own side, the South Australian Weatherill Labor government, for what they are doing with Transforming Health.

We know about the trouble-plagued EPAS system and the serious flaws of trying to get this electronic record keeping system into the new RAH, the problems and turmoils that have gone on with that, and of course we know that the floors in the hospital cannot actually hold filing cabinets, so we do not know where these files are going to be kept. They cannot get the EPAS system working and there are grave concerns about that as well.

Recently we have had the pathology stuff-ups which have caused incredible distress to men and their families who were told that they had prostate cancer, and then that they did not have prostate cancer; and that they had to go back for more treatment when, in fact, they did not have to go back for more treatment. It is a series of profound failures of practices under SA Health, led by the Minister for Health doing a deplorable job, and South Australians rightly are frustrated, confused and, more than anything, disappointed.

We know the $600 million over-budget spend that has already taken place on the NRAH project; again, a poor example of financial management. The cost blowouts are a shocking indictment on the Weatherill government's management, and that figure does not include the mounting costs associated with the EPAS system that I was referring to a few moments before.

Just last month, a survey from the Royal College of Surgeons showed that 84 per cent have major concerns and do not support the implementation process of Transforming Health; 71 per cent indicated that they have concerns with patient safety; 81 per cent indicated their concern for patient access to surgical services; 74 per cent indicated their concern with training of our future surgeons; and 49 per cent support the principles of Transforming Health—so 51 per cent do not even support the principles of Transforming Health. They are shocking figures, and that is the Royal College of Surgeons, who have no faith in what the minister is doing.

The big one today: the AMA and SASMOA survey came out, which found that 71 per cent do not believe that Transforming Health will deliver the best care, first time to South Australians; and 79 per cent of this survey's respondents felt that the consultation process had been poor and the minister is badly exposed on his repeated claim that Transforming Health is clinically led. That is what we hear from the minister—that this is all clinically led—yet when you hear from the clinicians themselves, they say they have not been consulted.

So we can hear those on the other side who say, 'Oh, we feel this, and this looks good and this looks good, and you've got to stop talking things down', but when these sorts of numbers come out and 71 per cent do not believe that Transforming Health will deliver the best care, first time for South Australians, and that comes from the AMA and SASMOA, the government should be alarmed. It has every reason to be alarmed, and South Australians have reason to be alarmed. The handling of the Transforming Health program and progress has been absolutely abominable, and South Australians have every reason to feel disappointed and let down.

I referred to the Marshall Liberal Plan and the 2036 vision for South Australia a number of times earlier in this speech. I stated that the 2036 vision document was the framework and that our policies will be hung off that. I would like to take this opportunity to elaborate, although I only have a few minutes left, on some of the policies that we have released already. I would like to talk about the council rate capping policy, which I think is a beauty, and one that will help people with the growing cost of living that everyone is feeling.

It will cap council rate rises, and an independent regulator through ESCOSA will set these rate rises so that councils will still be able to do the work they need to do, but people will not be gouged, and people will not have to pay excessively high council rates which add to the cost of living. We know that it is one of the biggest bills that comes to any household, and it also adds cost to businesses, so that is a great policy. And that is what my community tells me; I talk about listening to the community, and they tell me that they want councils doing the basics well, and that is what we like.

I do not have time to talk about high electricity prices (South Australia has the highest in the nation) and water prices, where the base price is controlled by the Treasurer, are a huge inhibitor to families and businesses, and we have called for an inquiry to get to the bottom of why our state has the highest water prices in the nation.

Uber is another great policy that we put out, and very quickly the government jumped on board, which was great to see. This policy will bring some excitement to South Australia: legalising ride sharing services has the ability to strengthen the South Australian economy, create jobs across a number of sectors and heighten innovation across the state. It also has great connectivity for people within South Australia.

Ride sharing is a great opportunity to increase competition, give customers a broader range of choice and services, and improve transport reliability and customer service. We know it has happened in all the other states; it is been rolling out there. We came out with the policy and the state Labor government jumped on board, although it has put a lot of regulations in place that are being debated at the moment, but this is our policy, which shows that we are offering great leadership from opposition, and the government is following. I do not have long to talk about the Glenelg Jetty project, but it is another exciting project that really could generate jobs, generate tourism and bring a lot of excitement to South Australia as well.

I have talked about the ESL hikes, and we know that they have been inflicted on South Australians. We will reverse $90 million of ESL hikes that have caused heartache and pain to all South Australians, and then we have our jobs stimulus plan. There is plenty there to do, plenty to be seen and plenty to be rolled out in conjunction with our 2036 document. The Marshall Liberal team has a great plan for South Australia's future, and I think it is bright, but it does need the Marshall Liberal plan to get us going forward.

Time expired.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Kavel.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (17:05): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I am pleased to make a contribution to the Supply Bill legislation. I do not need, perhaps, to describe what the Supply Bill looks to provide the state. I think that has been adequately covered by other members who have spoken to the bill, but it does provide an opportunity for members to really speak on a wide range of areas for which the government has responsibility.

I want really to reflect for a time on what this government has achieved over the past 14-plus years it has been in government. What have we got for 14 years-plus of a Labor government here in South Australia? Well, I will tell you what we have got. We have got the highest unemployment in the country, we have got the highest taxation in the country, we have got some of the highest electricity prices in the country and we have got some of the highest water prices in the country.

The Member for Mitchell touched on that in his contribution just previously; however, that is what we have got after 14 and a bit years of this Labor government, and that is just for a start. I will be talking about some other glaring examples of mismanagement and the like in my contribution. I would like to try to look at some of the positives that, perhaps, the government may have achieved in its 14-plus years.

There has been a lot of positive talk and discussion in the community about the redeveloped Adelaide Oval, and I agree: it is a good place to go and view cricket matches and football games. It is a very good facility, but how has the government paid for it? Everybody talks about how great the facility is, and I agree it is good. It is spectacular as you drive along King William Road to look into the ground. It is quite a spectacular view. However, how is that paid for?

People do not focus on what the government did to cover the cost of the redevelopment of Adelaide Oval. What the government did was that it sold the South-East forests after many years of hammering away at this mantra of 'no privatisation'. How long have we listened to the mantra of the Labor Party hammering away at no privatisation, and the Treasurer is nodding in agreement.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Point of order. Sit down, member for Kavel.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Point of order, ma'am. I was not nodding at the member's remarks.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I think you were encouraging him to keep going, as we all were, because you were having trouble saying the word, weren't you?

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I would like to ask: what action is it when a member moves their head in a sort of a vertical manner up and down? If that's not nodding, what is it?

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: It is unparliamentary, ma'am, to reflect on members in the house—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That's right; I agree with you. I upheld the point of order.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: —whether they are present or otherwise.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have upheld the point of order, and I would ask the member for Kavel to come back to the substance of his contribution.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Give me a break! What happens in question time every day of the blooming week? However, we heard for years 'no privatisation' under a Labor government, so what do we see? We see the South-East forests sold from underneath those communities down there and, if you talk to the member for MacKillop and the member for Mount Gambier and the federal member for Barker, they will tell you that it has been a complete disservice to those communities in the South-East to sell that state-owned asset from underneath them. That is a thing we should remind the community here in South Australia about: that that is what took place. After years of the Labor opposition saying, 'no privatisation', they privatised those forests to pay for the Adelaide Oval redevelopment.

So, you cannot believe what they say. The community cannot believe what the Labor Party tells them, because they tell them one thing and do exactly the opposite when it suits them. I do not want to be too negative and use other descriptive words—things like 'lying to the community'—but if I have to, I will. Really, when we look at things and critically, objectively assess what this government has provided to the South Australian public over 14 years, the negatives far outweigh the positives.

Let's have a look at things the government has dealt with over recent months. The Gillman land project: if there was ever an example of how to mismanage something, that is certainly it. All these baseless promises and projections were put out there and spun up into something that sounds pretty good. The Treasurer is at it again.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Kavel, you have been pulled up before on reflecting on members. I remind you that you are on one warning already. I would hate to cut your contribution short. I draw you back to the substance of your contribution.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I don't want that to happen, Deputy Speaker. Talking about Gillman, if there was ever a project that was spun up by the spin masters on the government side of things, that was it. What do we see? There have been so many variations when we have asked questions here in parliament about the Gillman land deal. The Deputy Premier gets up, and we have had so many different positions and—

Mr Williams: More positions than the Kama Sutra!

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I'm not going to say that. Nuancing the issue—talk about jumping around like a cat on a hot tin roof! There has been a judgement brought down about the government's maladministration in relation to that Gillman land deal—and the list goes on.

However, what is really at front of mind for the South Australian community is the construction of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital and the Transforming Health initiative. This is really quite a serious problem that the South Australian community is facing. We look at the new RAH, and again, if there was ever an example of how to mismanage a project, there it is: over budget, over time. The minister has to come continually into the house and go out and talk to the media publicly on pushing back the completion date.

I do not want to exaggerate things, but pretty much on a fortnightly basis there has been a completion date rejigged, to the point where, I cannot remember the title of the person, but a senior person who has been overseeing the construction of the new RAH resign just recently. If there is ever an indictment of frustration, I think that is probably it by that person in their resignation. It is a continual series of problems.

The last sitting a couple of weeks ago we highlighted the fact that there is a flaw (and this is a bit of a pun) in the construction of the floors of the hospital, because the engineering specifications are not sufficient to be able to handle a few filing cabinets full of patient records.

Do you know why? It is because of the failed EPAS system. Again, if there was ever an example of how to mismanage another project that the government has responsibility for, then EPAS is certainly up there. We have Gillman, we have the construction, we have EPAS, and what are they going to do? They are going to have to do construct a temporary facility to house the hard copy patient records because EPAS has failed.

You would really hope that the government could get something right sometime. You would really hope they could, but they cannot, particularly in relation to the provision of health services. It is quite frustrating. I have constituents contacting my electorate office on a daily basis, telling my staff and me how frustrated they are. Even Labor-voting constituents are saying, 'You know, Mark, we are so frustrated.' They are so frustrated with the level of ineptitude from the Labor government in really being able to roll out anything that is meaningful to the community.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: He is taunting me.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is unparliamentary to be taunted.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I know.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Don't you taunt him.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: We have got EPAS—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Kavel! I am sure the Treasurer won't have a frivolous point of order, will you?

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: No, ma'am. I could never possibly taunt the master of political debate.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That was frivolous. Okay, off we go.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: If that is not a taunt, then I don't know what is.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I said it was frivolous. I am incredibly displeased with the Treasurer, who may have to be called to order.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Goodness! We have EPAS in a shambles. We have the construction of the new RAH being pushed out all the time. We have doctors protesting en masse in relation to the transferring of the care from the existing RAH site to the new RAH site, and that takes me on to the big kahuna, being Transforming Health. What a shambles that is! Seriously, what a shambles Transforming Health is!

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: This is your Gettysburg.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Deputy Speaker, please, come on. This is not a joke.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: It's a compliment.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: No, it's not—it's not at all.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Treasurer is called to order.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Talking about issues with Transforming Health, we do not make this stuff up. We are getting letters from clinical specialists, professors, AMA surveys—you name it. We and the government are getting letters from the federal president of the Labor Party highlighting his concerns. What is going on there? What is going on there amongst the ranks of the Labor Party, where we have a federal president and a federal member of parliament breaking ranks, complaining and raising concerns with the Transforming Health initiatives?

That, to me, is a pretty serious breach of discipline within the Labor ranks. To my way of thinking, we know that the member for Port Adelaide is part of the hard left of the Labor Party—we know that—and my take on things is the hard left of the Labor Party is getting sick and tired of the dominant right faction ruling the roost within the Labor Party.

That is my take on things, that we are getting an uprising of the hard left against the dominant right faction within the Labor Party, and they are sick and tired of it. So he is writing a letter to the Minister for Health, who we know is part of the hard right within the Labor Party's factional system, complaining about what is going on at The QEH. This is clear evidence that Transforming Health is not working, because we are seeing senior Labor Party members breaking ranks.

We do not see that very often, but we have witnessed it. I have seen it over the years. When there is trouble and there are big concerns about what somebody might be doing, something that goes against the grain, there is a breaking of the ranks within the Labor Party. We have seen it over the years in previous terms in relation to workers compensation, and things like that, and other issues that obviously raise enormous concerns within the ranks of the Labor Party, and obviously Transforming Health is one of those.

We share those concerns and the community's concerns. We have done some surveys out in the electorates on this Transforming Health initiative. We are getting a massive response to it. Today in question time we highlighted a recent survey by the AMA. I just want to quote from it, if I may. AMA President Dr Janice Fletcher said, and I quote:

There is significant concern that the government is quite simply trying to do 'too much, too soon' in tackling this major reform with its reconfiguration of hospital services at the same time as the move to the new RAH and the introduction of the EPAS patient administration and medical record system…

During question time we asked the minister how he can substantiate claims that 95 per cent of the medical profession's clinicians support Transforming Health when the survey from the AMA and SASMOA clearly differs.

If you are out in the community, who would you believe? Would you believe the medical professionals or would you believe the spin that is coming out from the government? Well, I can tell you who I think the vast majority of the community believe. They believe the medical professionals, because they are the ones that people go to for their healthcare services. They are the medically trained, skilled professionals who go to university for at least eight years. Specialists sometimes study for more than 12 years, because they do their medical degree and then there is a whole lot more specialist training, and another four, five or six years, perhaps; so they are at university for the best part of 15 years. Then they come out and become medical specialists, and they know what they are talking about in relation to Transforming Health.

It is a hell of a mess. The government has got themselves in a hell of a mess over Transforming Health. We see the cost-cutting and reduction in services at the Modbury Hospital. I have spoken about that in this place on numerous occasions. My constituents are affected by the reduction of services at the Modbury Hospital. My home district (even though it is not in my electorate any more because it was redistributed out) will be affected, because the Modbury Hospital is the biggest public hospital that is closest to my home district, so those residents will be affected by the reduction of services at Modbury and being pushed out to the Lyell McEwin Hospital.

In question time today, in answer to a question, the minister said that there have been only two transfers from Modbury to the Lyell McEwin per day. Well, I can tell you, wait until—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: Two more.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Two extra, okay. Wait until the flu season hits, wait until winter starts to grab hold of us and the flu season hits. I bet there will be hell of a lot more, significantly more than two additional transfers from Modbury to the Lyell McEwin. The minister was trying to spin it today that it was just a minuscule number; when the flu season hits and the winter months come in it will be significant.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: A point of clarification, to give the member the opportunity to make a personal explanation. I understand he said that the president of the Labor Party had written to the opposition. I believe that the letter in question was not addressed to the opposition, but the member stated in his remarks that it was.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think his exact words were, 'we have letters from'. That does not mean it was written to him.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I am happy to—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: How he got it, though, is another question.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I am happy to correct the record—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: If that was what the—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: —Treasurer thought I said, that the letter was written to the health minister—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Who is it addressed to?

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: The letter from the federal member for Port Adelaide is addressed to the Minister for Health; however, the opposition certainly has a copy of it, because I have it here.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We are not sure how you got it, but that is another story. Who wants to speak now? The member for MacKillop.

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (17:26): I enjoy the debate on the Supply Bill because it gives the opposition the opportunity to speak on many things which we do not often get the opportunity to speak on in this place. It allows us to canvass a wide range of government initiatives and policy areas, and point out the real problems facing South Australia.

I want to dedicate a fair bit of my comments today to things that pertain particularly to my electorate, but I will also be talking about some things that are more statewide. I will not necessarily be putting them in any particular order, but when I came into the chamber the member for Kavel was talking about the government's decision, some years ago now, to sell the forest in the south-east of the state and the use of the money to pay for the upgrade to Adelaide Oval. That always was a dog of a decision, and history has proven the stupidity of that decision.

From memory ForestrySA, when it controlled the ownership of the forest in question, was returning to the coffers of the state up to about $40 million a year. OneFortyOne Plantations, which now has some sort of ownership of those forests, ownership for a bit over hundred years, is, I can tell the house, making substantially more than that. In fact, it is my understanding that it is making substantially more than double that and probably treble that, just because of the way it is managing the forest.

However, one of the downsides to that management is that it is logging the forest at a much greater rate than was previously done by ForestrySA, but the additional log that has been harvested is being exported as whole log. It is not being processed, and virtually all the processing in the Green Triangle region, which includes much of the western district of Victoria, was being done in and around the city of Mount Gambier. It was a great industry, it has been a great industry and a very important industry to the local economy, but now a substantial portion of the resource, the actual log that is grown in the forest, is being exported as whole log.

Why on earth would a state that has a struggling economy, that is looking under every stone and rock to try to find something to drive economic activity, go through a process of flogging off an asset—which I accept was certainly being underutilised—rather than utilising that asset to its potential, and creating or enhancing an existing part of the economy in the South-East? It is a great shame, and it will always be a great shame that the Labor Party in South Australia had such a short-term vision. That short-term vision applies to many of the actions of this government, and we are now seeing what is happening to the city of Whyalla and the pressure they are under in the city of Whyalla.

One of the really stupid decisions that this government has made in the last year or two was the land deal out at Gillman. It has been under a cloud ever since it was first proposed as a land deal, and this government has a long history of making pretty stupid land deals. I mean, look at the redevelopment of Port Adelaide. Look at what has happened there, and all the promises and all the rivers of gold that were going to flow from that.

We now have this so-called deal out at Gillman that was going to deliver thousands of jobs, was it? One of the projects that the government claimed underpinned that deal was a project to build an oil and gas hub—I guess a depot to service the oil and gas industry in South Australia, and that is not a bad idea. That is not a bad thing to have, but why was it proposed to build it at Gillman? Why was it not proposed to build that at Whyalla? Wouldn't Whyalla be a more suitable place to build a service centre for the mining industry, which by and large is in the north of the state? Whyalla would be a lot closer to the mining industry per se.

The government did have one proposal to support the development of an explosives manufacturing business, I think it was, at Whyalla, and I supported it. I think I was probably the shadow minister at the time and I supported that. I do not know that much has happened but—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: You were my favourite shadow minister.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: Yes, absolutely. Part of the problem we are seeing at Whyalla today—part of the problem—is that the local economy is not diversified, and the government has to wear a fair bit of the blame. Having been in power for most of the last 40 years in this state, and for most of that time basically having only one seat represented by a Labor member outside of metropolitan Adelaide, being the seat of Giles, it beggars my imagination as to why the Labor Party has failed to develop the economy of Whyalla, to guard it against the risk of damage to the whole of that community if something happened to the steel industry, and that is what we are seeing.

We are seeing a huge risk facing that community because the government of South Australia over a very long period of time has actually failed to diversify that local economy, and there have been plenty of opportunities. I would have thought that seeking to direct the development of an oil and gas hub to a place like Whyalla would have been much more sensible than the dodgy deal that has been happening with regard to the land at Gillman.

It is the long-term development of the state where this government has continued to fail, continued to falter and continued to fail the people of South Australia. This is why the people of South Australia are living in the state with the highest unemployment and where the propensity of young people, who are educated locally, are flooding out of South Australia to get the decent jobs that they have been educated to undertake.

I am very well aware of this, because I have two daughters who are both very well-paid professionals They both work in industries that are present in South Australia, but neither of them—although they did all of their education here locally—have ever worked for a paid day's employment in South Australia, much to the chagrin of their mother and, probably because of that, to the chagrin of myself. However, that is not an uncommon circumstance in South Australia and I think the government is certainly culpable.

Let me move on to a couple of things pertaining more to my electorate. I think it was the member for Kaurna who had a motion on the books—I am not sure whether it is still on the Notice Paper—about praising the government for the Southern Expressway and some words about the people of South Australia never ever again having a one-way highway built in this state. Ignoring the fact that it was a brilliant idea when it was constructed, and it was constructed by a government that was left with huge debts and no money to do very much, we provided an incredible service to the people of the south at the time.

Notwithstanding all of that, we have something not dissimilar happening in my electorate. The people of Penola have been promised a bypass, and there have been discussions ongoing in that community for over 20 years about building a bypass, particularly for heavy transport, around the town of Penola. I congratulate the government, and it was previous minister Conlon who struck a deal with the then mayor of the Wattle Range Council, the late Don Ferguson, and promised to fund, I think, up to $12 million towards the construction of the bypass.

Unfortunately, that money has been expended but we only have half the bypass. We have a bypass which goes halfway around Penola. It does connect a couple of major roads which come in from the west of the town to the road to the south of the town, which goes onto Mount Gambier, but you have to go back into town and continue up what was always the main street, the main thoroughfare through the town, to get to the north of the town of Penola.

As luck would have it, the commonwealth government and my colleague, the member for Barker, Tony Pasin, secured $9 million to put towards completing the Penola bypass. The only reason he secured that money was because there was commonwealth money available to be spent in river communities to compensate river communities for the loss of water and therefore the impact on economic activity in those communities.

This government—and there was $25 million involved—decided to not take up the offer of that $25 million. The reason it did that is, and it was quite open, it said, 'That would have an impact on the GST payments to South Australia and therefore we would lose some GST money and we do not want to be spending anybody's money in regional South Australia, we want to be able to spend it all in the city of Adelaide where our electors are, and if we get it in GST rather than in this grant that is where we will spend it.'

Then, as I said, the member for Barker, Tony Pasin, secured $9 million of that money to complete the bypass around Penola. There is one thing about this government: they are consistent. They would not forgo $1 of GST because that would mean that they are spending money outside of the electorates that are represented by Labor members and they would be spending money in other parts of South Australia. That is the only reason the Penola bypass has not been completed, because of GST.

This brings me to another point I want to raise. We see the Premier and the Treasurer playing this blame game against Canberra, and they are playing pure base politics. They are saying that the Prime Minister and the federal Liberal government should be doing this for South Australia and should be doing that for South Australia. What they never say is that every dollar that is spent in South Australia by the commonwealth, if they do fund some of these pie in the sky schemes, some of these things that the Premier and the Treasurer are telling the people of South Australia are absolutely essential, of course we will lose GST payments.

The Treasurer knows full well, I do not know whether he understands but he does know that there is a thing called horizontal fiscal equalisation and he does know that, at the end of the financial year, every dollar that is spent by the commonwealth in South Australia is tallied up and the formula that is used to work out our share of what commonwealth funds we should be getting is brought to bear and our GST payments are adjusted. That is how the GST payment system works.

We have seen it, and I will remind the house that this is what happened with the desal plant. What did we get? A $220 million grant from the commonwealth and our GST payments over the next couple of years were reduced by $212 million because of that very project. The net gain for South Australia was only $8 million.

Madam Deputy Speaker, that is the connection I make between the fact that we have this ridiculous situation where we have got only half a bypass around the town of Penola and the fact that we have the Premier and the Treasurer of this state being disingenuous with the people of South Australia when they lament that the commonwealth is not doing enough. The reality is that if the commonwealth spent more money in South Australia it would be obliged under the state/commonwealth financial agreements to reduce our GST payments. Now, that is something.

I talked to a senior South Australian businessman recently about this reality and he was quite surprised. He had never heard about it. I think it is something that this side of the parliament should be bringing to light much more regularly, such that every South Australian understands that the Premier and the Treasurer spend so much of their life talking absolute nonsense.

With regard to health, the member for Kavel, as have many of my colleagues, talked at length about the transformation of health here in South Australia and the building of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital, and all of the problems that have been created yet again by dumb decisions. I mean, the decision to build a new Royal Adelaide Hospital was one of the dumbest decisions this government has made, and that is a big call because it has made plenty of them.

However, the new Royal Adelaide Hospital is, what is it, the third most expensive building constructed on the planet, and this is for a new hospital in little old Adelaide. Madam Deputy Speaker, what a mess, and hopefully I will have time to come to the impact that is having in my electorate. I see that the bureaucrat that has been running the project to construct the hospital has resigned and we are importing another bureaucrat, from Canada no less, to take over the management of that.

I am only going on what I read in the newspaper, and as much as anybody in this place I understand that newspapers do not always get it right, but I am taking it at face value that the person who is being brought in to run this project actually resigned from their previous position in Canada because there was a change in government. Now, I find it fascinating that a project to construct the third most expensive building ever constructed on the planet is going to be managed by somebody who—and I am pretty sure I am drawing the right conclusion here—is incredibly partisan. They are so partisan that, when there was a change of government, they could not stay in their previous job. That is what the newspaper report said.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: About who?

Mr WILLIAMS: This Canadian bureaucrat that you are—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: She worked with the conservatives.

Mr WILLIAMS: I don't care who she worked with.

Members interjecting:

Mr WILLIAMS: I don't care. I question the reason behind why she was employed. Anyway, getting back to this dumb decision to build the new Royal Adelaide Hospital, the project has blown the budget.

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr WILLIAMS: Well, is it going to be 12 months' delay? The CFMEU says that is not really a delay, that there was a problem in actually signing the completion date. That was a ripper! Because this project is sucking so much money, I am having trouble with health services being delivered in my electorate, and we have all seen what happened in the Keith community a couple of years ago. We all saw what happened at Keith.

I have not read John Hill's book, but I was interested to read an article on it that suggested that he mentioned that one of the major mistakes he made was with regard to the Keith Hospital. But from my reading of it, and again from the newspaper article, in his mind the mistake was not that it was a wrong decision but that he did not realise the backlash that was going to occur from that community. It is outrageous that we had a minister for health who had that uncaring attitude to the delivery of health services in South Australia. The Keith Hospital is again under threat because the funding agreement that was struck between it and the current minister is due to expire at the end of June and the minister is reluctant to continue that funding arrangement.

I can tell the house that one of the reasons that the Keith Hospital has been unable to meet some of the targets that it was set in its business plan is because the Department for Health through Country Health SA has been pretty hopeless in its dealing in supporting the hospital. In one instance, it was trying to help the hospital get two doctors resident in the town. They were totally unsuccessful with that and the hospital eventually went to a different provider out of Victoria and now has two resident doctors.

Then it tried to get those doctors access to a clinic—which used to be manned from Keith, at Tintinara, also within my electorate—and it took over 12 months of bureaucratic bickering to get those doctors access to that clinic in Tintinara. In my hometown of Millicent, the local doctors have just told Country Health SA that they are unable to continue the after hours on-call service because two of their number have taken ill; and so the remaining doctors were physically unable to do that on-call service.

As a result of that, one of the doctors who is not ill, and who used to have a fortnightly minor surgical list in the hospital, has been told that he can no longer do that. Country Health SA is taking this out on the Millicent community and saying, 'You can no longer have those services performed in the local hospital because these doctors can no longer perform the after hours service, notwithstanding that two of them have taken ill.' It is a disgrace.

Time expired.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (17:46): Deputy Speaker, I rise to make a contribution on the debate today, late as it is, and indicate that the opposition supports the Supply Bill 2016 for the appropriation of money from the consolidated account for 2016-17. For the sake of the readers of Hansard, a supply bill is necessary for the first three months of 2016-17 until the 2016-17 budget bill, otherwise known as the Appropriation Bill, has passed through the parliament and receives assent. The amount sought under the Supply Bill 2016 is $3.444 billion. In the absence of supply arrangements, there would be no parliamentary authority for budget expenditure between the beginning of the financial year 2016-17, and the date on which assent is given to the 2016-17 budget bill. That all takes some time and includes having to go through this parliament and through the debate.

Like many others on this side, I am going to talk a little about the economic fundamentals of this state, and then spend a bit of time highlighting some of the issues, concerns and spending priorities in the electorate of Flinders. Sadly, the economic fundamentals are not good for the state of South Australia. There are no surprises, and everybody is aware of that. We hear a lot from the government about transitioning to a new economy. I am not exactly sure what transitioning to a new economy might mean at this stage, and what that new economy might look like. Certainly there is nothing on the horizon, and it is hard to imagine what a new economy might look like.

In fact, traditional industries are in decline, and I could highlight Port Pirie, of course, where the unemployment rate is around 15 per cent, the highest of any local government area in the state, despite the expenditure into Nyrstar. Port Augusta is seeing the closure of the power station and, just adjacent to that, there is the shutdown of the Leigh Creek coalfield, and there are the challenges that Arrium is facing in Whyalla. What was once known as the Iron Triangle is certainly facing a challenging, if not bleak, future.

I have a few stats in front of me that highlight the difficult situation that this state is in. I talked a moment ago about the unemployment rate in Port Pirie. In fact, across the state, the trend rate was 7.2 per cent in February this year, which turned out to be the highest in the nation. It was seasonally adjusted to 7.7 per cent in February, once again the highest in the nation. Exports in South Australia fell 0.4 per cent on an annualised basis, compared with the previous 12 months, to $11.7 billion. The government's target, as indicated by the government, was $18 billion by 2017, including services.

Our gross state product grew just 1.6 per cent in 2014-15, compared with 2.3 per cent nationally. Only Queensland and the ACT grew more slowly, meaning of course that South Australia was sixth out of eight jurisdictions—sixth out of seven states. There have been only 5,850 jobs created since Labor promised 100,000 extra jobs in February 2010, just prior to the re-election of that Labor government. Water prices have increased by 241 per cent since 2002-03, and I will come back to the impact that those water prices are having later in my contribution.

The CommSec State of the States report puts South Australia seventh out of eight in terms of economic performance, with only Tasmania having poorer economic performance across the nation. Due to the debt that is expected to peak at $13.5 billion in 2017-18, we are currently facing a $520 million annual interest bill on state debt.

Of course, that has significant impact. I think somebody calculated that is $1.6 million per day of interest payments on the state debt. The unbudgeted spending has amounted to $4 billion between 2002 and 2014-15, so the life of this government has had unbudgeted spending of around $4 billion.

Our leader made an excellent contribution earlier in the day. He spent quite a bit of time talking about the 2036 document, which of course the Liberal Party and leader Steven Marshall have released recently. It provides a framework—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Chapters one and nine.

Mr TRELOAR: Chapters one and nine particularly are of interest, and I am sure everybody on the other side has read—

Mr Picton: It took five minutes.

Mr TRELOAR: Well, it provides a framework and an excellent framework with which to go forward, and policy will be developed around that. The Deputy Speaker has mentioned chapter nine, and it is particularly pertinent.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: 9.4.

Mr TRELOAR: 9.4—let's have a look at that and see what it says. It is not my repetition; I am repeating our esteemed leader. Here we go: 9.4—'Balancing the budget and reducing state debt over the long-term'.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr TRELOAR: 9.3—'Providing high-quality services in an efficient way, eliminating waste and overspending'; 9.5—'Reducing the cost of living for families and households'; and 9.6—'Reducing the cost of doing business'. Of course, all we hear from small businesses in this state is about the cost of doing business. Certainly, a big part of that are the utility costs. 9.7—'Cutting red tape and modernising regulation'. That is chapter nine in quick summary.

It is certainly an excellent document. It has created a framework, as I said, with regard to growing our economy, providing the best education system in Australia, being a healthy state, strengthening our communities, building our state, ensuring safety and justice, protecting our environment, embracing our unique culture, and running an efficient and stable government. The document represents the values we will bring and the reforms we will implement to restore prosperity to South Australia. It is quite deliberately entitled 2036, because of course that is our bicentenary.

I want to now go to the seat of Flinders and highlight a few fundamental issues, I think, which require effort from government. Often it is a combination of both state and federal, but particularly at this time I would like to talk about mobile phone blackspots. I know the member for Mount Gambier has already spoken about this, but regional members will be well aware that, as they drive the many thousands of kilometres that they do annually right across their electorates right across the state, mobile phone service drops in and out.

For large areas of regional South Australia, there is little or no phone service. I have got to the point now where I can almost indicate to the kilometre as to when I am going to fall in or out of service. It is a very serious issue, particularly for those people who are living in those areas and trying to do business in those areas. Obviously, our businesses are competing in a world market, and a big part of that competitiveness is having adequate communication. Last year, there was a wonderful opportunity for the state government to make a contribution to mobile phone towers within regional South Australia. Unfortunately, it proved—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr TRELOAR: The commonwealth funding was available—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It is unparliamentary to interject and unparliamentary to respond to interjections.

Mr TRELOAR: —and, in fact, there was a commitment of $100 million, but it was supplemented by funding commitments from the government of New South Wales, who put in $24 million, while Victoria put in $21 million, Queensland put in $10 million and Western Australia put in $32 million. From Tasmania, there was $350,000, as well as around $1.7 million from local governments, businesses and community organisations. South Australia was the only state that failed to contribute, and that is reflected in the low number of blackspots that could be addressed in South Australia under the funding guidelines which sought to leverage co-investments.

There were new towers erected as a result of that funding arrangement. In New South Wales, 144 went up; in Victoria, 110; in Queensland, 68; in Western Australia, 130; in Tasmania, 31; and in South Australia, just 11. There were just 11 new mobile towers last year. I am not critical of this, but I note that four of those were in the APY lands. Those people deserve a mobile phone service just as much as anyone else, but the population, I suggest, is particularly sparse in that part of the world. There is another round of funding open at the moment, and the challenge is for the state government to step up to the plate and make a contribution not just for the people who are living in country areas—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr TRELOAR: —but for the people who are travelling through country areas and the people who are trying to do business in country areas. The people who live in country areas are competing against the rest of the world. They are competing against Canadians, they are competing against Europeans, and they are competing against North Americans. They deserve the opportunity to have reasonable communications.

I note that before the parliament at the moment there is a motion to note the NBN report from the Economic and Finance Committee. I will take the opportunity then to talk about the NBN rollout because it is another pressing issue in regional South Australia, particularly with regard to the delivery of health and education services.

Obviously, we are more and more reliant on the internet. We in this place could not work without the internet each and every day. I know for a fact that there are senior high school students in country South Australia attending area schools who are taking their senior subjects remotely and are severely disadvantaged purely and simply because of inadequate internet access. As the Treasurer rightly pointed out, a lot of this is a federal responsibility, but there is a place for state governments to keep pressure on and make a contribution, I think, to mobile phone tower funding in particular.

I would also like to talk, as always, about water on the Eyre Peninsula. I note the state government is providing some expenditure, as of their last budget, on the upgrade of the reservoir bank at the Tod Reservoir. This has locals mystified, I must say, because it is being labelled as an upgrade or put forward as an upgrade. It is going to strengthen the dam wall but in fact diminish the capacity of the reservoir. I know the Tod Reservoir has not been utilised for potable water since 2002, but it seems a crying shame to me to essentially walk away from a lot of the infrastructure that has been in existence for over 80 years. It is certainly workable, and it provides that little bit of extra water security for Eyre Peninsula.

We have now the opportunity, via third-party funding access legislation, for new parties to come into the water market, and I actually believe there is a prime opportunity now. The time is ripe for private investment companies to step into the water market in South Australia, particularly in places like Eyre Peninsula with coastal towns such as Ceduna, Streaky Bay, Port Neill—the list goes on—where companies could invest in small desal plants. I think the days of large desal plants are well over, despite this government having famously promised way back in 2002 that a desal plant would be built on Eyre Peninsula. Those days have disappeared, I think. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.