Oaklands Park Rail Crossing

Mr WINGARD (Mitchell) (14:55): My question is also to the Minister for Transport. Can the minister explain why the signals at Oaklands crossing have failed numerous times in the past few months, banking up traffic on occasions for more than 50 minutes?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:55): I thank the member for Mitchell for his question. Members would be aware of the problems that the Oaklands crossing has been providing to the road network and, more importantly, to those people who have had to rely on that part of the road network for many years. The frustrations of having newly electrified and more frequent train services on the Seaford line of course have only been exacerbating those frustrations, as the record number of patrons we have on the Seaford line have the unfortunate consequence of bringing the boom gates down over that road crossing at Oaklands more often, and that is a massive frustration during peak periods.

I'm very glad to say that, due to some very good design work and some fantastic procurement outcomes on the north-south corridor, we have identified sufficient savings on both the Northern Connector project and the Torrens to Torrens project so that finally, after it being long awaited by the communities of the southern suburbs, we now have not only a solution for Oaklands crossing but we now have the funding for it. We now have the funding to deliver a solution to Oaklands crossing where we can remove those train services from the intersection, whether that's—

Mr WINGARD: Point of order: No. 98. I just want to bring the minister back to the substance of the question as to the extended number of boom gate delays, where the boom gates have been stuck over the past few months.

The SPEAKER: I will listen carefully to what the minister says.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: This solution to fixing the Oaklands crossing boom gate issue, which is frustrating so much traffic, can be fully funded from the savings that we've identified on the north-south corridor projects. This will mean that, at no further cost to the federal government—

Mr Wingard: But why are they getting stuck now?

The SPEAKER: The member for Mitchell is warned for the second and final time.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: This will mean that, at no further cost to the commonwealth government and no further additional cost to the state government, which of course is co-funding those upgrades to the north-south corridor, we can fix Oaklands crossing. There is absolutely nothing standing between the residents of the southern suburbs and the people who rely on this part of the road network from getting what they have long wished for—and that's an upgrade to Oaklands crossing.

The terrific thing about it is that, just like those other projects that we have been funding with the commonwealth, they are jointly funded. It means we are putting money in and it means the federal government is putting money in. So, when there have been those erroneous communications by the South Australian Liberal Party, which have been masterminded by the member for Unley and also the member for Mitchell, we are actually putting our money in to fix that problem with the boom gates at Oaklands—

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Point of order: standing order 98, debate.

The SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I was saying, as the member for Mitchell said, it was a lie. Yes, it was a lie, and that's why the Electoral Commission required the Liberal Party to retract that misinformation that they gave to those people in the southern suburbs.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Point of order: he is defying your ruling, plus the same point of order again: debate—98. He just continued doing exactly the same thing.

The SPEAKER: Has the minister finished?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: No, not quite, Mr Speaker.

The SPEAKER: Well, in that case I will have to call him to order.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In progressing this solution for the problem with the boom gates at Oaklands crossing, we are proposing that the entire cost can be met from both the federal and the state governments with no further budget burden to either level of government.

As soon as we get that stroke of the pen from the federal government that enables us to redirect this funding from those other projects, which are being delivered and delivered successfully—indeed, in one instance at least, the Torrens to Torrens Project ahead of schedule—we will be able to move on to the Oaklands crossing project. That nearly $200 million project will not only support hundreds of jobs during its construction, supporting better employment outcomes for the South Australian economy, but will give a much smoother, faster and more reliable journey on that part of the southern road network.