Parliamentary Committees

Economic and Finance Committee: Annual Report 2014-15

Debate resumed.

Mr SPEIRS (Bright) (11:08): I rise this morning to speak very briefly on the 89^th report of the Economic and Finance Committee of the South Australian parliament. This report relates to the period from July 2014 to June 2015. I was a committee member, as alluded to by the Chair of the committee (member for Little Para), from October 2014 through to the end of that financial year and, obviously, continuing on to the present day.

I think it is interesting to reflect on what our standing committees of parliament do achieve in any given year, and the annual report to parliament provides the opportunity to do so. I really enjoyed being part of this committee: I think it does some quite good work, and we have the opportunity to delve into a range of issues that affect the economic standing of South Australia, something which, as we know at the moment, is not quite what many of us believe it could be. This committee gives us the opportunity to look at that in detail, bring in experts and outside witnesses to talk about various issues and actually undertake a bit of an analysis as to how particular issues and areas impact our state's economic progress. So, it has been good to be on this committee since October 2014.

There are many things in the South Australian parliament that happen because they have always happened. I am very much of the view that the South Australian parliament needs to undergo a process of significant modernisation, and that is across the board. I think there are many things we do because tradition dictates that, and that is a good thing and we should cleave to history and build up a series of traditions and processes over time, but equally we should also continually be looking for ways we can improve systems and improve the processes of parliament.

Part of a symptom of a long-term government and the tiredness that comes with that is, after some time, a failure to shake up the systems and processes of parliament. I am not speaking specifically about the Economic and Finance Committee here, but I think across all our committees there is an opportunity to look at how we could do them better. The member for Little Para referenced the hosting of the Australian Public Accounts Committee Conference back in April 2015.

One thing I learned from that conference was the fact that many of our counterparts overseas and interstate actually have their committees chaired by a non-government member, and that is no disrespect at all to the member for Little Para's chairmanship of this committee: I think he is a very fair and a very balanced Chair and does an excellent job in that role, but I do think there is an opportunity to look at how our committees are formulated in the future and whether they should have a government Chair, because that is not always the case interstate and certainly is not always the case overseas.

I have just returned from a week over in the UK, where I had the opportunity to visit my native Scotland and the Scottish parliament and look at their committee system, a very powerful committee system because it is a unicameral system of parliament in Scotland. Those committees, by and large, were chaired by non-government members and often had a balance of non-government membership so that the government of the day, both interstate and in overseas jurisdictions, did not necessarily have the ability to vote anything that they wanted through on these committees.

Again, this is no reflection on the Economic and Finance Committee, and I am not saying that that necessarily happens there, but I think there is an opportunity in the South Australian parliament to look at our standing committees, look at how they operate and look at ways we can do them better. It has been good to be part of the Economic and Finance Committee over the past 18 months or so, and it has been interesting to be part of several inquires, including the inquiry into the National Broadband Network, looking at the rollout of high speed internet in South Australia and looking particularly at the economic opportunities, which can be grasped as part of the rollout of the NBN, and also looking at ways the rollout could be done better to maximise those economic opportunities.

We had the opportunity as part of that to go on a couple of regional trips. We went up to Port Augusta to look at the rollout of the NBN there, and we also went to the Elizabeth area and down south to the southern suburbs, where we visited Aldinga and Willunga as part of that inquiry. It was a very interesting inquiry to be part of, and I learnt quite a bit personally as part of that process.

The Economic and Finance Committee has had the opportunity, as is always the case, to look at the Sport and Recreation Fund, the emergency services levy process, and then we had two other specific and unique inquiries which have been undertaken by the committee, both of which are continuing to progress at the moment—that is, the labour hire inquiry and the inquiry into introducing a rate cap on local government rates to look at the impacts that that would have on local government and the opportunities that would present for South Australian households.

The rate capping inquiry was one that I had the pleasure of being able to introduce to the committee, and I was very pleased to have bipartisan support in progressing that inquiry which has been a very interesting inquiry. I know there are differences of opinion on this side of the house, but again we have had an opportunity to have a fairly fair set of hearings. We have heard from councils, individuals, academics and people who have additional external expertise in this space, and that is the benefit of the Economic and Finance Committee. It allows us to step away from the hustle and bustle and the theatre of parliament and delve into these issues in a bit more detail.

The labour hire and the rate capping inquiries are ongoing, and I think the rate capping inquiry is due to come to an end fairly soon, so it will be interesting to see the outcomes of that. I am not sure the two sides are going to reach a unanimous report on that issue, in the same way as we did in the National Broadband Network inquiry; regardless, it has been a good and thorough process.

In closing, I would like to thank my fellow committee members, the current committee members being the member for Little Para in the chair, the member for Colton, the member for Wright and the member for Light; and from the opposition, myself, the member for Schubert and the member for Hartley. I would also like to extend my thanks and gratitude to the hardworking staff of the committee during the period that we are considering (July 2014 to July 2015): Susie Barber, Lisa Baxter and research officer, Dr Gordon Elsey. It is also worth giving thanks to Kendall Crowe, who has come on board to support the committee and who finished up last week after several months of service to the committee. I would like to thank the staff and my fellow members for their involvement in the committee and commend the 89^th report of the Economic and Finance Committee to the house.

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (11:17): I will be quite brief. I am quite excited now to be a member of this committee. It has been an ambition of mine since I came to this place and I am lucky enough to be appointed, not in this period but I was lucky to be appointed earlier this year under the wonderful stewardship of the member for Little Para. I do not think the member for Little Para should take the amount of turnover in MPs and staff in this committee personally. I think he does a fantastic job.

I want to highlight some of the things that have happened between the July 2014-15 year but not go over the ground that the member for Bright went through. On Monday, we are going to be considering the emergency services report for this year. It is interesting that that has already been made public before we could consider it, but that is fine, that is the way it works. I know that I would not be allowed to talk about it until it was accepted by the committee, but that is fine, rules for one and rules for the other.

If I go back over last year, we had the $19 million increase the year before. Last year, we saw another $15.3 million in increases from $261 million to $276.3 million and, as the member for Little Para talked about, it was to do with the Sampson Flat bushfire. It really is quite frustrating that we are considering another 1.5 per cent increase this year. We have now had Pinery, we have had Sampson Flat and then we had Eden Valley and the other associated fires that were around there at that time.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We have a point of order.

Mr Knoll interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just a moment, member for Schubert. Please sit down. We have a point of order.

Mr ODENWALDER: Point of order, Deputy Speaker, perhaps a point of clarification: I just want a ruling on whether the comments should be confined to the period of the annual report we are talking about.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I apologise; I was speaking to the whip and I was not listening. The remarks should refer directly to the report. I will now start to listen earnestly and hope that the member for Schubert observes the standing orders, particularly in front of our guests in the gallery.

Mr KNOLL: Certainly. It is interesting that the appendix to the annual report actually goes through every report the Economic and Finance Committee has done since 1992, so I think it is within that. Essentially, the two points I want to make are that the previous year we had a $90 million increase and now we have had a $15.3 million increase last year.

Also, what we found at this corresponding meeting that happened on Mondays last year was that the emergency services reforms were being undertaken then by the member for Light, who was the minister at the time. Through the consideration of the ESL for the year it was uncovered that $550,000 was spent on a reform process that was ultimately scrapped. We saw on the front page of the paper yesterday that another $300,000 was spent in the 2014-15 financial year on giving a redundancy payout to Grant Lupton, who was the chief of the MFS, a man who was highly respected and highly credentialled. It was interesting.

I really think the government needs to understand what the term 'redundancy' means. In my understanding, it is when you make a position redundant, which is why it was quite surprising to find out that Grant Lupton was replaced by Mr Crossman less than two weeks later. On 17 March, Grant Lupton formally handed in his resignation, and Mr Crossman was appointed sometime in March—we cannot find the exact date, but it was certainly within two weeks. I think maybe we need to have some basic lessons in industrial relations, and I am sure we can explore that issue further.

We now have a tally of $850,000 that has been spent on the member for Light's flights of fancy, and I fear that there is more still to go. It really is galling. There is a huge amount of goodwill in the community when it comes to paying the emergency services levy, thinking that it goes towards hardworking firefighters and emergency services workers and that it goes to equipping trucks.

It certainly goes to those things, but when it also goes towards projects that ultimately fail like this, and we see solid sums of money wasted on these ministerial trips of fancy, I think that it does not do justice to the goodwill that exists within the community. I certainly implore the government to make sure that it takes care of every cent it takes from the taxpayer and treats the money as if it were its own. I know this next comment will be out of order, but I would prefer not to wait 12 months—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Then don't do it.

Mr Knoll interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, member for Schubert, if it is out of order, don't do it.

Mr KNOLL: Well—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, you have just admitted—

Mr KNOLL: With respect, this is ridiculous.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am standing up because no-one is paying any attention to the standing order about interjections and making noise when someone is on their feet. If we can restore order, the member for Schubert can keep speaking. The member for Schubert.

Mr KNOLL: Instead of waiting 12 months, I would like to thank Kendall Crowe now for her work on the committee. I think she is finishing up with us on Friday. I know that she was not there as part of this report, but she has been marvellous and certainly I think extremely thorough and helpful in everything she has done. She has certainly been very helpful to me with a lot of the simple questions that I have had, and I would like to thank her for it, so thank you.

Mr ODENWALDER (Little Para) (11:24): I want to thank the member for Bright and also the member for Schubert for their remarks. The member for Schubert, of course, skated perilously close to the edge of standing orders almost continuously. However, he did remind me—and I will also perhaps break with tradition—and I will thank Kendall Crowe as well, who did step in this financial year to help us out. This is the only opportunity I get to thank her publicly and I do appreciate the work that she did for the committee over the last year or so.

I also want to echo some of the remarks of the member for Bright, which may be surprising to him. I agree that the committee system could stand some looking at. I think that often it is very much weighted in favour of government members, particularly the government chairs. I think there is room in the system for perhaps a bit more independence on the parliamentary committees, which would probably lead to more bipartisan approaches to some of these issues.

Mr Pederick: You'll get counselled for that.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Hammond!

Mr ODENWALDER: I beg your pardon?

Mr Pederick: You'll get counselled for that.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Hammond!

Mr ODENWALDER: No, I won't.

Ms Digance: He can think independently.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr ODENWALDER: I will not respond to the kind interjections of the member for Elder. In general terms, I do agree that sometimes it is frustrating sitting on a committee knowing that some of the conclusions are foregone. I think it does bear some looking at. Perhaps the member for Hammond is right, perhaps I will be counselled for that! But I am happy to wear it because I believe it. In any case, I want to thank both speakers for their contribution and also for their continued contribution to the committee. I hope that both of them will continue on the committee; they are both valuable members, and it is a pleasure working with them as it is with all the other members. I commend the report to the house.

Motion carried.