Bills

Supply Bill 2017

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (15:45): I rise to speak on the Supply Bill 2017 which proposes to give the government $5.9 billion to spend in the next financial year, ahead of the budget being prepared. This is equivalent to five months' worth of the budget, or five-twelfths. Previously, for the last several years, this has been in the vicinity of $3 billion. Why is there such a large increase of almost double the money that is not being accounted for that is simply being given without reason?

Why can this Labor government, after 15 years, not deliver a budget in a timely manner, well before the end of the financial year, so that they do not have to ask for the equivalent of five months' worth of money without any approval, without any transparency and with no idea of what the money is for? I note that the Victorian government, the New South Wales government and the federal government have managed to get their budgets prepared in the month of May with plenty of time, not needing a huge amount of appropriation without any due consideration.

For the last two financial years, the government have described their budgets as jobs budgets, yet the statistics show that the unemployment rate for South Australia is 6.7 per cent, which is the highest in the nation. We have 58,800 people unemployed and looking for work. Only 16,900 jobs have been created since Labor promised 100,000 extra jobs in February 2010. Since 2004, 39 companies have closed in South Australia and 72 companies have downsized. During Labor's 15 years in government, 7,728 companies have been declared insolvent.

This government has no ability to manage the finances of the state, nor does it have the ability to help the economy, to help small businesses to grow and to help people stay in our state. We know we are losing people interstate: our net interstate migration for the year ending September 2016 was 6,484. The people who are leaving are leaving because they are getting jobs interstate. These are highly employable people who are very valuable to our state. They are leaving because there are no opportunities for them in South Australia.

I reflect on one of the main reasons that I decided to run for parliament. There were two main reasons, but one was that I could not bear the thought of this Labor government destroying my state any further and watching the poor priorities. The bad economic management of this state was all too much. Having a modelling agency, I saw young people finish their degrees and leave our state for work. That was one of the reasons that prompted me to get involved in parliament so that I could make a difference and make the changes that were required.

I believe that people with a small business background, an entrepreneurship background, who have worked and who can see opportunities, who have started something from nothing after risking everything they have to make a go of it, are exactly the type people we need in parliament to turn around the economic mess that we have after 15 years of Labor. We cannot afford to be losing our best and brightest out of the state.

We also have another issue. Some people come back to have their children and then many of them leave again. Most of the people in my age group, in their 40s, leave because the management and the higher positions are in the head offices in Melbourne and Sydney. Remember that in the eighties, we were in the top 3 of the states, not only in population but in the number of the top 100 companies. So, you could have upper management jobs and stay in South Australia, whereas now there are hardly any of those jobs.

In fact, I meet people every week in a situation where the husband now lives interstate, away from the wife and family. We know South Australia is a beautiful state. It is a wonderful place to live. We have great weather, we have great city planning, we have great amenities in our state, but we do not have jobs. Many families are being separated so that the husband or the wife, whoever has the job interstate, spends most of their time living interstate, or it could be that they fly out for the week and then fly back. We must put an end to that and get our state working again.

Nearly every primary school in the state seat of Adelaide is at capacity. Prospect North is almost at capacity for the first time, but every other school is at capacity. We need to be looking at how we change our schooling zones, or whether we add extra schools or add extra capacity to the schools we have. I note that Labor has been forced into implementing the Liberal policy that was announced in 2009 for a second city high school. Thankfully, that is underway and should hopefully open in 2019.

I note that for around a decade there was an issue that was ignored by the Labor government. It was only through the persistence of myself and the parents on the governing councils and all the principals of the primary schools, through their hard work and lobbying, that finally Labor had to listen. They are finally building a second high school. It should open 10 years after it was announced by the Liberal Party, but better late than never I guess you could say.

In my electorate, I have been doing extensive doorknocking as I have done for every election, as I have done for the two federal elections and as I have done every time there is an issue that is worthy of doorknocking the area. The main issues that are raised continually are around development. This Labor government's pig-headed pursuit of their own deeply flawed 30-year plan, with overestimated population targets, has meant there has been a rush to put high-rise development, tilt-up concrete and unacceptable developments throughout all residential areas.

In Prospect in particular, where the mayor was the Labor candidate and very keen to pursue the Labor policy, we have seen a plethora of units being built all along Churchill Road and Prospect Road where residents continually complain to me about the poor design, the lack of green space, the lack of parking, the issues for traffic management and the overshadowing of their gardens, their solar panels, their sunlight and their enjoyment. The issue we will have when all the gaps are filled and these units are built right to the boundary is that, as soon as the next lot of units are built in the gap, their balconies will basically be touching.

There are grave concerns. I have had people in tears, long-term residents of Prospect, who are moving out because they cannot bear what is happening to their local area. It is not that people are opposed to development and improvement. Prospect is actually one of the most densely populated suburbs in Australia; it is not as though we needed to rush to add more people. A lot of the blocks are quite large and were already being split into twos and threes with hammerhead developments and duplexes adjoined with a wall.

There was no need for us to push ahead and rush to build as much as possible, which now means that everyone is regretting what has happened in Prospect. It is also happening in the city. The Mayfield development is a good example. At least five years ago, I remember being part of community protests in Whitmore Square against the Mayfield development when they were proposing three towers. I believe they were to be around 10, 12 and 14 storeys high.

Five years later, that project is not off the ground at all, despite increases in height limits being approved. People in Adelaide do not want that development. They are not prepared to live in that style of development. I note that the Ergo Apartments that were also released for sale around the same time, which I believe are four or five storeys in height, sold like hot cakes. That development is finished and people have been living happily there for years now.

You do not just develop the highest you can, with as many people as you can and make as much money as possible. You need to look at development that people actually want to live in, that enhances the natural community that we have and does not destroy the very way of life that people live in an area for: the trees, the greenery, the community feel.

I met Jan Gehl in Copenhagen. The famous architect from Copenhagen has done several reports in South Australia and he said that if you cannot design a building that is profitable to five storeys then you are not a very good architect and you are not a good businessperson. We do not need high-rise to be profitable or affordable. We need to start thinking about our own community and what Australians like living in and start developing that with high quality. Yes, we need affordable housing, but we do not need every single bit of space used up, leaving us with no greenery and with overshadowing and no design. We need the structures to look good.

We have had 15 years of a Labor government that pays lip service with grand gestures and reviews. We need action. We do not need any more reviews and commissions we need action. The state government is expecting a $300 million surplus this year. However, bear in mind that they received a $490 million payment for the Motor Accident Commission, which they sold, which is privatisation.

This government keeps going on about ETSA being sold, yet during its time, and during my term here in parliament, this Labor government has sold the forests, it has sold the lotteries, and it has sold the Motor Accident Commission. Kevin Foley even tried to sell a building in the city the government did not even own. They are now selling the Lands Titles Office. I believe they are selling the State Administration Centre and buildings around Victoria Square. Anything that has value, this government is selling to prop up its own budget so that it will leave an incoming government—hopefully a Liberal government next March—with absolutely nothing to work with.

But we will—and we will do it gladly—build from nothing, as I did with my business. I started from nothing. The Liberals know how to do that. Unfortunately, history shows that Labor comes in, spends all the money, trashes the house and sells any assets that make money. The Liberals come in and have to fix it all up again. We will do it and we can do it.

Under this government, we have seen our water prices rise by 233 per cent, to the extent that the sewerage and water services just coming to your house are so expensive, particularly in my electorate, where the cost of land has increased so significantly that one of my residents, 96-year-old Dorothy, in order to try to save money on her water bill, uses her rainwater tanks and carries buckets of water into the house. That really does not do a lot other than hurt her back, but she feels that she needs to save every bit of money that she can because she is on a pension and it is very difficult to afford even just the supply charge.

The supply charge is actually the biggest amount that she is paying, but to try to save even a few dollars she risks injuring herself by carrying buckets of cold rainwater from her backyard into her house. This is what this Labor government has done to the people of Adelaide and South Australia, not to mention the power bills and the crisis that we are having there. We know that we have the most unreliable, highest-cost power in Australia. We should have low cost power in our state. We have plenty of assets that can produce electricity.

We have gone too fast, too soon with our green energy, without a proper backup, without a base load supply. There have been many warning signs that this government has ignored, including an offer from Alinta of $25 million over three years that would have secured a base load during the transition. We are all of the view that a transition to green energy is wise, but it must be done in a sensible way so that you do not shut down businesses, that you do not lose jobs and that you do not have households losing all the food from their fridges and freezers, hundreds of dollars worth, because we cannot get our energy mix right. That just shows you what this Labor government is all about.

Whilst we will support the Supply Bill, I note that this government continues to be reckless with our state's money and economically mismanage our state, as it has done for the last 15 years. Hopefully, by next March, we can put an end to it.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (16:00): I want to make some comments in relation to the Supply Bill. I do not think that I need to traverse what the Supply Bill looks to achieve. I have been here long enough to understand what this piece of legislation is all about. Questions have been raised on this side of the house in relation to the increase in funding sought concerning the Supply Bill between now and when the budget is brought down in about six weeks' time.

I listened to the leader's contribution today. As usual, he laid out the argument extremely well and succinctly. He did an outstanding job in highlighting the deficiencies of this government over a very long period of time, over the 15 years it has been in power. One of the interesting statistics I took from the leader's contribution was that in 2012 the level of federal government grants was $8.2 billion and that five years later, this year (2017) it has increased to $10.5 billion. That is a 25 per cent increase over the last five years.

For this government to bleat, cry poor and say that the federal government is underfunding them and to make all sorts of baseless accusations is blatantly incorrect. We have seen a 25 per cent increase in those grant moneys over the last five years. I think that is a very important point to reiterate and for the South Australian community to understand.

The next couple of months will be a very important period for my electorate in particular because two significant infrastructure issues need to be addressed. Members of the community and I have been calling for these infrastructure projects to be funded in this year's budget. The first project I refer to is the regional sports hub proposed for Mount Barker. I have previously spoken extensively in the house about this project. We are looking at funding stage 1, which includes facilities, ovals, courts, soccer pitches, to provide sporting facilities for AFL football, soccer, tennis, cricket and netball.

Stage 1 of the project is estimated to cost $11.8 million. As we know, the federal government has committed $3.75 million. I have written to two ministers, the Minister for Regional Development and the Minister for Recreation and Sport, seeking the state government to match, at least at a minimum, that level of federal government funding of $3.57 million. At the time that the then member for Mayo and the Prime Minister announced the federal government funding, the Liberal Party on this side of the house called for the government to match that level of funding at a minimum of $3.75 million.

I have written to both the Minister for Regional Development and the Minister for Recreation and Sport. I also led a delegation to the Minister for Regional Development last year that was made up of the local mayor, Mayor Ann Ferguson of the Mount Barker District Council, and senior council officers, such as the CEO. Also in attendance were the president of the local football club, representatives of the Hills Football League and representatives of the South Australian National Football League (SANFL). We met with the Minister for Regional Development to highlight the critical need for this important sporting project.

We all know that Mount Barker is one of the most rapidly growing districts not just in South Australia but right across the country. Significant tracts of land are being opened up for development. Back in December 2010, the government rezoned 3,000 acres of land for residential development. Progressively, the development applications are being processed by the local council and they are being approved. We continually see houses being built through those areas of development.

This growth puts pressure on the facilities and the services within the town and within the district, and this is no exaggeration. We hear a fair bit of exaggeration at times in the parliament, but I can assure the house that this is no exaggeration. The sporting facilities in the Adelaide Hills, particularly in the Mount Barker district, are being utilised at an over capacity level, so it is critically important that the government listens not just to me in the house but to the community concerns on this issue.

I know that the local council has made a number of representations to the government over a period of time in relation to the regional sports hub at Mount Barker. As I said, I led a delegation to see the Minister for Regional Development last year. I met with the Minister for Recreation and Sport's Chief of Staff and his sport and recreation adviser to highlight the importance of this important infrastructure project. I strongly urge the government to provide at least $3.75 million in this year's budget.

A couple of weeks ago, a meeting was held in Mount Barker and attended by people who were interested in the project. They were provided with an updated overview of what the project involves. I have had representatives from the community come to me to emphasise the importance of this project. This is pretty much what we refer to as a 'shovel-ready' project. I heard the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure on the radio this morning talking about shovel-ready projects, and I can assure the house that the regional sports hub is a shovel-ready project.

To provide the house with bit more information, quite a detailed report was tabled at the Mount Barker council meeting last week, and that obviously passed through the council with unanimous and strong support. The community supports this project and the local council supports it. All we need is the state government to support it by approving at least $3.75 million in the budget in a couple of months' time.

The next issue I want to refer to is what is known locally as the Nairne intersection. This is the T-junction where Woodside Road meets with the Old Princes Highway. This is another issue I have highlighted before in the house going way back to over 10 years ago. To provide the house with a little bit of history on the matter, I lobbied extremely long and hard on this issue more than 10 years ago. Approximately 10 years ago, if my memory serves me correctly, there was some work done on the intersection, and the school crossing was shifted from the western side of the intersection to the eastern side and upgraded as a signalled crossing. Previously, it was a school crossing with the old-style, 25 km/h flashing lights with a marked area across the road.

The local schoolchildren would hold out the lollipop signals to stop the traffic and then the schoolchildren would cross the road and go up Saleyard Road, which is very close to that T-junction intersection, to the school. That was dangerous. Some motorists would not obey the signalling from the children. The children were being abused. It was an unsafe and unsatisfactory situation. A decade ago, the government moved that crossing from the western side to the eastern side and put in a signalised, push-button pedestrian crossing. The children and other pedestrians use it and walk up a special path that has been created into the school grounds.

At that time, the government thought that might be a solution to the traffic congestion at the T-junction. I can tell you that it has not been. I questioned it at the time. I did not think it would be a solution, and that has turned out to be correct. At certain times of the day, in peak hour in the morning and evening during school drop-off and pick-up times, the traffic banks back along Woodside Road and for several hundred metres back across the railway line, so the situation is quite unsatisfactory.

A community forum was held last week hosted by the Liberal candidate for Kavel, Mr Dan Cregan, an outstanding young gentleman who is certainly campaigning strongly to hold the seat. Dan Cregan, the Liberal candidate for Kavel, held a forum in Nairne, which about 80 people attended, on this specific issue of the traffic condition at the Nairne intersection. They had the local council representation and a traffic engineer speak at the forum. It was a very worthwhile community engagement, with 80 local people attending, so that is evidence that there is strong community concern in relation to this issue.

Again, we are calling for a long-term solution to be funded in this budget in six weeks or so. Whether it is a roundabout, traffic lights or whatever the solution is, we need the government to commit to the solution in this year's budget and then put it into place. There has been some discussion that they could somehow synchronise the pedestrian crossing, which would help with the traffic congestion and traffic flow through the T-junction. They are talking about that being a short-term measure. My concern is that sometimes these short-term measures turn into long-term solutions and nothing is progressed, and I am not supportive of that proposal at all.

They said that moving the crossing from the west to the east was going to assist and it has not. I cannot see how synchronising the signalling on the pedestrian crossing is going to work. We need a long-term solution delivered and thought through sensibly, whether it is a roundabout or signalised traffic lights on the intersection, that looks to include Saleyard Road, which runs up to the school. A significant volume of traffic runs up to the school at drop-off and pick-up times.

But it is not only that. We have also seen an increased volume of traffic at the intersection since the Bald Hills Road interchange on the freeway opened because, as I predicted, if motorists from those towns to the north—for example, Woodside, Oakbank, Lobethal—are looking to travel onto the freeway, they are now coming into Nairne and going down the Old Princes Highway onto Bald Hills Road, onto the interchange and then onto the freeway, whereas previously they were getting on at Mount Barker at what we call the Adelaide Road interchange.

The Bald Hills Road interchange is a magnificent infrastructure improvement and something that I lobbied for very strongly for a long time and something the previous member for Mayo delivered in his time as local member. I am very pleased that it has been delivered but, as a result, motorists from those northern towns in the electorate are coming through Nairne and putting pressure by way of increased volumes of traffic on that intersection in Nairne. I cannot stress enough that these are two important local infrastructure projects that I am urging the government to fund in this year's budget.

Bill read a second time.

Supply Grievances

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (16:17): I move:

That the house note grievances

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (16:17): I would like to resume with some of my concerns, particularly those around economic growth in South Australia, but I want also to touch on population growth because it is the key ingredient for economic prosperity. It is the key ingredient for vibrancy in South Australia, a great state that in 2016 lost 6,484 people to interstate. I think that is a damning statistic that shows that, while South Australia continues to lose great minds, future minds and our future brains trust (it is called 'the brain drain'), we continue to see a population exodus out of South Australia. People are not leaving just because they are going to a warmer climate; they are leaving because they cannot get a job or because there are job opportunities interstate.

If we look at population growth, and we look around the country, New South Wales has the majority, Victoria then comes in, followed by Queensland and Western Australia and then South Australia. Once upon a time, South Australia always had a strong population growth and it was always about third on the list. We are now languishing way down the bottom of mainland Australia. If we look at population growth—and this is what I want to talk about—Victoria led the way with 1.94 per cent population growth and in New South Wales it was 1.36 per cent.

If we want to get further into it, Queensland's growth is 1.3 per cent, Western Australia 1.15 per cent and South Australia's growth is 0.57 per cent. That is a damning statistic in itself because it shows that this state has little to offer and, in response to that, people are leaving. Why are they leaving? Because they cannot get a job and they feel uneasy with the uncertainty of what South Australia has to offer, but it is also about businesses that are going interstate to set up. It is about businesses that are shutting shop. I want to touch on some of the medium to large businesses which have closed. I will also touch on some of the small to medium businesses that have closed around the state. The number of businesses in South Australia that have either downsized or closed is quite damning.

We know that Kimberly-Clark closed. We know that Sheridan, the linen people, downsized by 150. AGL downsized by 200. GMH has downsized by 600 with more to go. In 2008, we remember the closure of Mitsubishi and the loss of 930 jobs. However, the list goes on, and it is not just about ones and twos; it is about huge businesses like National Foods in my Riverland electorate. National Foods closed in South Australia, losing 200 jobs. They relocated to Griffith, New South Wales, where they built or upgraded a plant. It meant that we did not have outlets for processing or manufacturing, so again we have lost that extension with a business that has either relocated interstate or downsized here for the sake of jobs. There were 200 jobs that were lost in that one exercise at National Foods in Berri.

We look at Clipsal which has closed. Bridgestone closed here and South Australia lost 600 jobs. Bianco Steel Supplies, that was 50 jobs lost. We look at Santos downsizing by 100. We look at Carter Holt Harvey, the timber industry in the South-East, the sale of the forest, and 207 jobs just gone. Orlando Wyndham downsized in South Australia, 85 jobs gone. I go all the way down the list. Accolade Wines at Reynella lost 175 jobs; Qantas, 150; we look at Mondello Farms in my electorate which closed, 140 jobs. Then we have Holden walking away again; they have downsized and 400 more jobs have gone; Penrice, 180 jobs, Pacific Services Group, 100 jobs; and the list goes on. We look at the jobs that went from Nyrstar. This is a continual trend of businesses in South Australia that are closing.

I understand if some are downsizing or restructuring their business to deal with all sorts, but this is a continual trend. All these businesses have either closed or downsized, and it continues to happen. The more I look at the numbers, the more I see how businesses are closing. There were a couple in 2005, but the closer we get to 2014, the more jobs have gone. I have two full pages relating to resources that have either downsized or closed in 2015. We get to 2016, and I have more pages. It is just heartbreaking to think that these businesses are moving out of South Australia.

Why are they moving? Are they seeing other opportunities interstate? Is it cheaper to operate a business interstate? Is it easier to access a skilled workforce interstate? Is it because the South Australian skilled workforce that they need has moved interstate, so they are chasing that skilled workforce? It really makes you wonder. The cost of power, the cost of any of the utilities and the cost of water are issues. We all know that in manufacturing the two prime ingredients are power and water. Again, South Australia is there at the top of the tree when it comes to the cost of power and water. It really resonates as to what is going on in South Australia.

We look at red tape. We look at the NRM levy increase, and that is just a cost-shifting exercise by the government, dipping into the pockets, particularly of landowners and water licence holders. We look at the disgraceful behaviour of the state government when it came to blackspot funding. It was about the state government collaboratively putting some money on the table, with the federal government, with local government, with business, to actually understand that technology is part of tomorrow's world. Technology is part of today's world, yet they would not put money up. Round 2 came along and they decided they would put some money up, but it was not even anywhere close to what should be about South Australia moving into the next dimension of technology, research, helping our businesses.

If we look at one of the great shining lights in our export economy, it is food, it is beverage. What are those food producers and beverage producers doing? They are all using technology on farm, they are all using GPS, they are all using satellite imagery, and they are all using their markets. While they are in the tractor, they are selling the produce they are harvesting. It is all about giving them the tools to generate an economy, giving them the tools to make South Australia's bottom line look good, make it look healthy. When they do that, that is when the government can stand up and say, 'Look at how good South Australia is. Look at the numbers.' At the moment the numbers are not showing that form of support.

We look at the road maintenance backlog and supporting those people who are bringing their produce to be put into manufacturing, supporting those food producers who are bringing their product down to the port, bringing their product down to the airport. It is about making sure the roads are safe and that they are acceptable. I note that the Minister for Transport has put some money into upgrading shoulders, small amounts of money, but it is not the amount of money that we need to see going into productive infrastructure here in South Australia.

It is all very well that we are having all these wonderful north-south corridors, that is great, that is something we need to do too, but we need to actually put the spotlight on productive infrastructure in the regions of South Australia that are going to help us with efficiencies, that are going to help us when it comes to growing our economy, employing more people, exporting more. That is what it is all about.

I just want to touch on the issue of Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme. This is a great opportunity. It is treated water that is currently flowing out to sea, and it is going to be put into pipes and it is going to be put into food production. It is a great initiative. This has been on the burner for a while now, and we have seen it announced, I think, two or even three times, but we are yet to see it actually enacted.

What about the rest of the coastline that the treated water is being pumped out to? There is all the South Coast, we have Christies Beach, we have Glenelg, we have Bolivar, we have the treatment works down in the Onkaparinga. Where is all that water being used? Why can we not make it affordable, put it into purple pipes and put it out onto our parks and gardens and stop pumping or using the draw from the River Murray? Put that water into the market and let us start growing our economy. Put that water into the market so that we can grow more food, grow more wealth and employ more people. It is a pretty simple analogy of what we could be doing with water that is currently being pumped out to the sea.

What is it doing to our gulf waters? What is it doing to our seagrasses? What is its impact on our fish stocks? We see at the moment that the government has reduced bag and boat limits. I will seek to continue my remarks on another day.

Time expired.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (16:28): Until the budget last night, I was not going to speak on the Supply Bill, but I have decided I will speak because of the lack of commitment to a sustainable future for the steel industry in Whyalla. You would like to think that last night would have been an opportunity to flag a strong commitment to the steel industry in this country, a strong commitment to the production of structural steel, but there was not a single word in the budget last night.

What that means is that if the federal government does not come to the party the state government, in its budget, will have to do the serious heavy lifting when it comes to ensuring the survival of the steel industry in South Australia. I am not totally lacking in confidence that the federal government will do the right thing. I am hoping that in the coming weeks, as it becomes clear who the new owner is going to be, there will be an effective partnership between the state government and the federal government when it comes to sustaining the future of structural steelmaking in this country.

There has been a one-way exchange so far about our procurement policy. Let me tell you a little bit about steel procurement policy in this state. When I was elected as the member for Giles, I indicated to the Premier that my number one priority was the overhaul of steel procurement in South Australia—my number one priority. In order to do that, the work was pursued over a period of time to the point where we have ended up with the best steel procurement policy in the country, and you do not have to take the government's word for that.

Mr Knoll: Have you put a $70 million order in?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Schubert, let me see what you are on.

Mr Knoll: My dance card is full.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Have you been out yet, because you will be going. Those lips cannot move.

Mr HUGHES: You can refer to the words of the Australian Steel Institute back in 2015 and you can refer to the words of Arrium back in 2015, before they went into administration, when they glowingly indicated that South Australia had the best policy in the country.

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

Mr HUGHES: Indeed, it is true. It is absolutely true and, as I said, you do not have to take—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I just remind the member for Chaffey that his dance card is also full.

Mr Whetstone: Full?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, which means you will be leaving us—

Mr Knoll interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You will both be leaving if there is another sound.

Mr HUGHES: Without a doubt, we have the best steel procurement policy in the country. At the time we introduced this policy, I had a debate in the media with Rowan Ramsey, the member for Grey, and I indicated to him at that time that when the federal government was handing out money to the states for various infrastructure projects and construction projects they should make it a requirement of that federal government assistance that Australian steel be used in those projects. Rowan Ramsey, the member for Grey, rejected that out of hand. He said, 'Nothing to do with the federal government. It should be up to the state governments to decide whether they use Australian steel.'

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I know you have spoken, member for Chaffey, so you obviously do not want to stay in the room; is that right?

Mr Whetstone: I want to listen to facts.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, if you want to listen, then listen in silence.

Mr HUGHES: You can go and get the Whyalla News from that period. He indicated that it should be up to the states to determine whether they used Australian steel in their projects. I agree that before the policy change some of the projects in this state fell well short of where they should have been. They fell well short of where they should have been, and that was my motivation for initiating the change in steel procurement policy in this state; hopefully, as a result, it will lead to policy changes in the other states and at a national level. As has been indicated, some states do not do too badly. Victoria has been mentioned as one state that does not do too bad a job when it comes to steel procurement.

Recently, we had the Acting Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce, in Whyalla to witness the signing of an MOU with the administrators and Adani in relation to a potential project in the north of Queensland. The interesting thing about that project is that it has not gone ahead. There is no go-ahead for that project at this stage, yet we had this travelling circus come to Whyalla to try to argue that that particular contract, if it were to go ahead for the supply of rail, would be a lifesaver for the steel industry in Whyalla. I think the exact expression used was 'a lifeline'. Anybody who knows anything about the steel industry and that particular contract knows that the contract itself, if that project ever does get the green light, would be over a two-year period. In year 1, it would represent just over 25,000 tonnes of steel and, in year 2, just over 25,000 tonnes of steel.

The steel industry in Whyalla produces close to 1.2 million tonnes of steel per year, so the contract is not a lifeline to the steel industry in Whyalla. What would be a lifeline to the steel industry in Whyalla is something similar to what Adani is going for in northern Queensland. They are going for a $1 billion concessional loan in order to help that project in northern Queensland get off the ground. It is interesting to reflect upon the bucket of money that comes from. That is a $5 billion bucket of money available for northern Australia.

There is nothing comparable available for the communities of Upper Spencer Gulf or Eyre Peninsula to assist with the types of projects we have in our area. If it ever goes ahead, the Adani project will secure something like 1,200 employees with Adani. When you count contractors, there are approximately 2,000 to 3,000 jobs in Whyalla alone when it comes to the steel industry. It raises an incredibly important question: if Adani were to get the go-ahead for that $1 billion concessional loan, what would happen to all the other really worthwhile projects throughout Australia where it might make a difference to get concessional loans from the federal government at that scale?

There has been some discussion recently about Iron Road because the state government has now signed off on all its approvals for that project. It is still a project with a long way to go, in that it needs over $4 billion worth of investment to get off the ground. If a serious concessional loan were available for Iron Road, it could make a real difference to that project. Why are projects in South Australia not given the same weight and the same attention as those in other states?

When it comes to my community, whether it is concessional loans or whether it is direct grants, it will make a real difference because Whyalla is facing an existential threat if we do not get the support required. It would be deeply concerning. The scale of the job losses and what would happen to my community would far outweigh any of the support offered to maintain the steel industry. It was disappointing last night to see that the federal budget did not flag up-front support for projects in South Australia, but especially for the Whyalla steelworks.

Time expired.

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (16:38): Deputy Speaker, I just want to say that even though my dance card may be full from time to time, as the 1998 winner of the year 10 Christian Brothers and St Aloysius dance class best couple I will always find room on that dance card for a dance with you.

In talking about the Supply Bill and grieving on the Supply Bill, I have a wish list of projects I would like the government to consider in the lead-up to the state budget, and hopefully part of the $5  billion that is on the table as part of the Supply Bill can go towards those. Before I do that, I want to finish a topic I missed out on during my grieve yesterday, and that is to thank and congratulate the 11 men and women who were involved in the Barossa Vintage Festival's Young Ambassador Program that finished up on the Sunday of the Barossa Vintage Festival at the Feast, Folk and Fossick festival. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the winner, a very vivacious and intelligent young woman named Nicola Biagi, whom I met on a number of occasions throughout the program.

For the uninitiated, the Young Ambassador Program is designed around helping young people to understand better the beautiful place in which they live and to become fierce advocates for the Barossa, and Nicola is certainly one of those. Her project centred around bringing a music festival to the Barossa that featured female headline artists. It was said of the project that it had the level of detail and sophistication that could actually make it become a live project in the Barossa. I look forward to going to that festival, and if Nicola needs a washed-up, has-been, early-2000s DJ, then I would be more than happy to participate.

I also want to congratulate Maddison Perry, who was also an award winner. I particularly want to congratulate Ellie Neindorf on her participation. She happens to be the housemate of Courtney from my office who long suffered Courtney's discussions on this topic, and I actually think Courtney was more upset than Ellie that Ellie did not win; nevertheless, congratulations to everybody who was involved in the project.

There are three main areas that the government needs to consider investing in in the beautiful Barossa Valley. This is a highly productive area, an area that punches well above its weight in the return it brings to South Australia and an area that really does not ask much of government. It has an unemployment rate sitting at about 4 per cent, which is the envy of the rest of the state. We produce about $150 million worth of wine exports and we bring in somewhere between $150 million and $200 million worth of overseas and interstate tourism. On top of that, depending on the season, we produce somewhere around $1 billion worth of wine.

It is an extremely important region so, Mr Treasurer and Mr Premier, we ask for only a few small things in return. The first and foremost is funding for a new Barossa health facility. I know that a business case has been conducted. The government will not give me the business case, saying that it is subject to cabinet-in-confidence. I hope that means that it is being considered as part of this budget process and the lead-up to this year's budget. I look forward to there being a fully funded, full-scale business case into the building of a new health facility. I put on record that I would be more than happy to help to bring the community along with whatever type of facility the government feels needs to be put on the table.

In terms of road funding, there are a couple of spots that really need to be looked at, and the first of those is a 5.2-kilometre stretch of the Davison Road to Freeling. It has to be one of the most awful patches of road to drive on and one that is becoming an increasingly important thoroughfare to bring the new expanding suburb of Freeling closer to the Barossa where a vast majority of people do their shopping and many people come to work.

I also want to highlight the section of Owen Road below Hamley Bridge. The recent Pinery fire and subsequent flooding last year have essentially disintegrated the road to a point where the government has had to patch up certain sections with gravel. They recognised that, above Hamley Bridge, Owen Road needed upgrading and they have committed to that. Congratulations on doing that, but I contend that that piece of road below Hamley Bridge is actually used much more often and is in much worse condition than that which is above it, and I desperately call on the government to fix it. I have had a huge number of people contact my office about that.

In terms of education infrastructure, I still believe that Nuriootpa Primary School and Nuriootpa High School have work to do. Again, both those schools were given money in relation to the STEM upgrades in last year's budget, but the structural issues with Nuriootpa Primary School will still remain. It is an odd experimental-shaped school that has some significant acoustic issues that need to be dealt with.

Also, Nuriootpa High School, which is seeing record levels of students this year—just under 1,000 students—desperately needs investment. It is doing a great job of educating our young people. It is why people from far and wide in the district are choosing to send their kids there. It needs to have their money invested in it in line and commensurate with the confidence that locals have in sending their children there.

The third area that I want to talk about is in relation to mobile blackspots. As the member for Chaffey illuminated in his speech, the government failed to put any money on the table for the first round of the federal government's mobile blackspot funding program. They put a measly $1½ million of state government money into the second round of mobile blackspot funding. We know that round 3 is underway. It is a huge issue within my electorate. Next to roads and the hospital, this has to be the most important issue.

So many small businesses within my region want to start up, and are starting up, and they desperately need connectivity to help take their business to the next level. Mobile communications, in my view, is the great limiter that is stopping the flourishing of businesses across rural and regional South Australia, and if fixed it can help us drive economic growth in our state. There are over 40 identified blackspots within the Schubert electorate, but I want to highlight some of the more major ones, and they centre around two towns at the back of Eden Valley, being the town of Eden Valley itself and Springton. We need better connectivity between Greenock and Kapunda.

The town of Wasleys is a dead zone when it comes to mobile phone coverage. You can get phone coverage up until and past the town, but in the town, where the people actually live, is the place you cannot get any mobile reception. There are some things underway, with Telstra and, potentially, Optus getting involved, but that is certainly an area in which the government needs to get involved. Lyndoch has poor mobile reception coverage, to the point where a temporary tower had to be put in place to provide enough connectivity for the thousands of people who came to witness the stage ending during the Tour Down Under in January.

There is also a mobile blackspot between Sandy Creek and Concordia. In fact, you only have to travel a couple of kilometres out of Gawler and, all of a sudden, your mobile phone coverage becomes extremely patchy. It is extremely important that this is an area in which the government invests, and it is something that we will be looking for in this year's budget.

The last thing that I would like to address is the funding of the upgrade to the Stott Highway. Last year, I wrote a letter to minister Malinauskas in the other place about a seven-kilometre stretch of road from the outskirts of Yalumba Terrace in Angaston through to the Mid Murray Council border heading towards Keyneton. To my surprise, I got a wonderful letter back from the minister saying, 'We are going to reseal seven kilometres of your road.' I thought that was fantastic. I gave the government credit for that.

That work was supposed to start in February and March this year, and when the work did not start we again sought some reassurance from the minister about what was going on. The minister's response was not that this seven kilometres of road was going to be sealed. He said that there was only going to be $500,000 worth of shoulder sealing. I am no civil contractor, but resealing seven kilometres of road is not the same as shoulder sealing that same stretch of road for $500,000. When questioned about it a third time, it seems that minister Malinauskas's office backflipped and conceded that there has been a serious delay in the resealing of the road and that we are to expect that to happen sometime before the end of calendar year 2017.

I still fundamentally do not understand why you would go ahead with some shoulder sealing works only to come back six months later to reseal that same section of road, but I am willing to keep an open mind that the government is not stuffing us around and that we will see the very much needed upgrade to the Stott Highway. These are things, amongst others, that I will be looking for in the budget in mid June.

Ms COOK (Fisher) (16:49): I rise today to speak about the extensive investments in my electorate of Fisher made by the Labor team in the last few years. The government is committed to delivering for the families of the south in suburbs such as Aberfoyle Park, Chandlers Hill, Happy Valley, Reynella East, O'Halloran Hill, Woodcroft, Clarendon, Cherry Gardens and Coromandel East.

As a lifetime local, spending all my life living in Morphett Vale and Woodcroft, I have lobbied hard to secure for our community the highest standard of public education, the safest transport and the best community and sporting opportunities. I know what a difference it makes to get a good education, to be able to safely and easily travel around our local area and to enjoy the connectedness and good health that come with sport and community engagement.

I am proud to say that I have lobbied hard during my time in this place for the best interests of my community. With the support of the Labor team, I have achieved some outstanding results for local people. I will take you through just some of those, starting with Happy Valley Drive. For many years, it has been a common complaint amongst locals, including me, that Happy Valley Drive was undulating and rather noisy. I was delighted to secure funding to upgrade Happy Valley Drive as part of the additional $70 million allocated towards critical road maintenance in the 2015-16 budget over four years. This work was completed in late 2015. These upgrades make for a better travelling experience and also improve safety on our roads.

The next achievement relates to Kenihans Road. For 32 years, ever since I got my learner's permit, I have been negotiating the complicated series of intersections around Bishops Hill Road and Regency Road. This is a trip that many locals make daily and, like me, other drivers have complained. In fact, this is one of the issues that most commonly comes to my office. It is little wonder that this stretch of road also has the highest number of accidents of any road in my electorate.

That is why I have been lobbying the transport minister and have secured $350,000 for a road management plan for not just Kenihans Road but also Candy Road. The plan will not only provide an overview of existing operational and safety issues along Kenihans Road but also identify short to medium-term traffic management treatment options to be implemented, including treatments for intersections at Tripoli, Bishops Hill and Regency roads, as well as at the junction of Candy Road and Main South Road.

The plan will cover from Chandlers Hill Road at Happy Valley Drive to the junction of Panalatinga Road and Reynella East, as well as the Candy Road and Main South Road intersection at O'Halloran Hill. When this plan and the resulting works are completed, it will no doubt lead to a safer and more comfortable journey for drivers in the electorates of Davenport and Hurtle Vale in the future, as well as visitors to the area. I am proud to have negotiated this outcome for my local community and look forward to seeing a much improved Kenihans Road, where the works have already commenced.

Other resurfacing works that I have been pleased to push for and have achieved upgrades for include the resurfacing of Black Road and Chandlers Hill Road. As part of the critical road maintenance periodic asphalt resurfacing program, approximately six kilometres of asphalt resurfacing work was undertaken on Black Road between Main South Road and Main Road in February this year.

This work included the removal and reinstatement of the existing asphalt surface to improve the road condition for all road users. The works were completed on 18 March 2017, and the ride is much smoother. As part of the state periodic maintenance program, approximately 1.2 kilometres of spray sealing work has also been undertaken on Chandlers Hill Road, between Kenihans Road and Education Road. This work was completed on 14 March 2017.

There is also a project coming up called the Flinders rail link project. Transport is not all about roads, so I am delighted that $85.5 million is being invested over three years in the Flinders rail link project. This project is jointly funded by the commonwealth and will make life easier for the many people in my area who study and work at Flinders University, or study, work and access services at Flinders Medical Centre.

As a former nurse—I am a current nurse working here, but I was formerly at Flinders Medical Centre—I know that attracting great staff to work at our hospitals is as much about providing them with safe and affordable ways to get to and from work as it is about the experience we provide them when they walk in the door. The Flinders rail link project is a great investment with wideranging benefits, including employment benefits for the south, with 70 full-time positions being created during construction. I am a great advocate for the use of public transport, especially to major facilities like our hospitals and universities where parking comes at a premium. I hope that this measure will help reduce traffic congestion and deliver environmental benefits, too.

In respect to education and the STEM labs in particular, as a nurse I am passionate about health care and the science and technology that go into creating healthier communities. Our future as a city and a nation does lie in the science, technology, engineering and maths fields. Some people like to include arts in that as well and make it a STEAM focus. We can make great cultural, health and economic advancement by investing in these fields. While that includes investing in things like state-of-the-art hospitals like Flinders Medical Centre and the soon to be opened new Royal Adelaide Hospital, it also means investing in our kids' education so they are ready for the jobs of the future, the jobs of an advanced economy.

Last year, Aberfoyle Park High School secured $2.5 million under this Labor government's science, technology, engineering and maths lab upgrade program. That work is now well underway and I look forward to seeing the final result, a result that will no doubt entice young minds into the wonderful world of science and help fuel our economy into the future.

The school loans scheme has also been a big winner with Pilgrim School in Aberfoyle Park, as part of the campus schools, winning under this Labor government. Under the innovative school loans scheme, which provides low-interest loans to schools for STEM and early-learning facilities, the school has been granted more than $1 million. This was just in the first round of the scheme. I look forward to advocating for more schools in the upcoming rounds of this valuable fund.

In regard to air conditioning, it is a simple fact that kids cannot learn if their environment is distracting and uncomfortable. In fact, kids are quite easily distracted sometimes. Old and ineffective air conditioning can make learning a lot less enjoyable for teachers and for students, so I was delighted to secure $100,000 in last year's budget to replace outdated air conditioning at Aberfoyle Park High School. Greater comfort for students and staff means they can all get on with the important task of learning and teaching our kids, not fixing the air conditioning or wondering how they will fund the repairs.

The Sustainable Schools program is a fantastic initiative for our schools with lighting and energy of course being critical infrastructure for good learning environments. As a Labor government, we also want to do what we can to model environmentally responsible behaviours for our kids and save our schools money so they can spend it on education.

That is why I am delighted that nine schools in the electorate of Fisher/Hurtle Vale recently received funding under the Sustainable Schools program, with $25,000 for LED lighting provided to the Aberfoyle Hub R-7 School, Braeview, Happy Valley Primary, Morphett Vale East, Pimpala Primary, Reynella Primary and Woodcroft Primary. This is expected to save each school $5,000 a year. Aberfoyle Park High School and Wirreanda Secondary School will also receive money: $250,000 each to fund solar panels. Those schools will save an estimated $30,000 each year in energy costs, which is a great investment that is good for education and great for our environment.

Sport has always been a huge part of my life. The Active Club grants, through the Office for Recreation and Sport, play a critical part in supporting the activities in our southern suburbs. We are blessed with so many active sporting clubs and more than a few are champions in their field. Sport is critical to the health of our communities both in terms of our physical health and wellbeing but also in building community spirit and teamwork.

I am proud to have advocated for sports grants for my local sporting teams and clubs. As the patron of the Hub Netball Club, I am delighted that they have scored $4,800 in the latest round of Active Club grants from this Labor government. The Coromandel Valley Croquet Club has potted more than $2,600, the Flagstaff Community Centre scored $4,500, the Happy Valley Football Club is kicking goals and getting more than $2,800 to build a barbecue area, and O'Halloran Hill Tennis Club aced it with more than $1,400. All up, 15 local sporting clubs have scored funding under the Active Club program in my area since 2014 and, each year, more clubs in my area have been successful. Those amounts of money may be modest, but they make a big difference to our clubs and the health of our communities.

One club that is very dear to my heart is the Happy Valley BMX Club. I am very proud to announce today that the Happy Valley BMX Club has been granted $3,600 for a great program called Cruises for Seniors. It is funded through the Labor Grants for Seniors fund. Cruises for Seniors will create opportunities for older people to take up or get back into the sport of racing BMX in our local community. The program will include come-and-try nights and senior classes at weekly race meetings.

The funding comes on top of $200,000 that this government provided in 2015 to bitumenise the club's berms. Berms are the angled bank curves that make up the track. This upgrade has improved speed, safety and also capacity while reducing the ongoing expenses. Of course, Happy Valley is the home of Sam Willoughby, and we all send our love to Sam and best wishes for his recovery. I have visited Sam recently, and I can tell you that he is doing really well.

There are many more success stories in Fisher and much more to do. The investments are only possible with a hardworking and committed local member—a person who can get the ear of decision-makers, who can make the case for the people of Fisher, who has walked in their shoes and who is truly part of the community. I am really proud to be that person. Hopefully, the people of Hurtle Vale will also support me.

Mr DULUK (Davenport) (16:59): I would also like to make a contribution to the supply grieve. I hope that the state budget coming up at the end of June is as good for South Australia as the federal budget handed down last night was good for South Australia and Australia. We saw massive investment from the federal government in those things that are important to so many Australians. Most importantly, there was an investment to guarantee the funding for the NDIS, which is a very important scheme and one that receives bipartisan support, but up until last night it was not fully funded. With the announcements from Treasurer Morrison, we are going to see the NDIS fully funded, which is wonderful for South Australians and all Australians who live with a disability or their carers, so there was some good news in the federal budget last night.

It was also good to see the federal government commit to its infrastructure spending. Projects in my community such as the Darlington project are receiving 80 per cent funding from the federal government, which is of such benefit to residents in my community. Also, as the member for Fisher touched on, the train link to Flinders University, and the extension of the Tonsley line to Flinders University, and the investment in public transport that that will create for our community are so important. Congratulations to Treasurer Morrison on his budget.

I hope that the budget to be handed down by Treasurer Koutsantonis is as successful but I am not going to keep my hopes up, and I know that so many of us on this side of the house are not. How do we know that it probably will not be a good budget? Because the best indicator of future behaviour is to look at past performance, and on past performance we have seen year on year neglect by the Labor government to properly invest in South Australia, to properly deliver programs that will deal with the big unemployment issues that face our state, and we have failed to see time and time again any decent investment from this Labor government in my community.

The financial mismanagement of this state is one of the reasons why the government has not been able to invest in my community. We have seen huge budget pressures year on year from this government and that is a result of bad policy decisions. That is a result of years of squandering GST revenue under premier Rann and treasurer Foley, and we have seen that continue with Premier Weatherill and Treasurer Koutsantonis. We have seen the disgraceful Transforming Health proposal, which we all know is designed to save the government money but has done anything but that.

We have seen repeated failures by this government to care for our most vulnerable and disadvantaged, including the absolute disgrace that was the Families SA royal commission, and at the moment with Oakden we are seeing the disgraceful care provided to South Australians. That all comes at a cost. Not only does it come at a moral cost, a cost of care and a cost to those who are negatively impacted by bad government policy, but there is the financial cost of the cover-up, there is the financial cost that goes with holding a royal commission, and there is that whole financial cost. We have seen department after department squander and waste money on the implementation of terrible public policy by this government and that leads to the inability to be able to invest properly in infrastructure.

At the same time that this has been happening, the government has been flogging assets left, right and centre. In 2015, we saw the sale of the Motor Accident Commission. Before that, we saw the sale of ForestrySA, the Lotteries Commission, Glenside acreage, the Hampstead hospital, and we have the government's stubborn commitment to sell the Repat. It is funny that, with all the asset sales at the moment, so much of those asset sales have to do with health, and so much community infrastructure is being destroyed by this Labor government through the sale of key community assets, especially key community health assets.

The sale and closure of the Repat is an absolute disgrace as so many of this side of the house know. I believe that many on the other side of the house know as well. It was a bad policy when it was announced, and it is an even worse policy today in the light of what is happening with Oakden. We know that Oakden is going to be closed, but we also think the Oakden facility could be moved to the Repat site which is ready to go. Of course, it has a wonderful standard of care, a wonderful reputation in its care, and it is a site that is begging to be used as a public health asset. However, this government is forging ahead in its stubbornness to close the Repat and to close the Oakden facility as well.

On this side of the house, we have a policy to commit to renewing the Repat and retaining its specialist dementia ward (Ward 18). We should use that ward for the residents of Oakden as a home for those needing care into the future. As I have said, this government has an opportunity to stop the sale of public assets, especially public healthcare assets, and has the ability to deal with this crisis at Oakden at the same time as keeping the Repat open, which is an important issue. The government has that opportunity in the budget that will come before us in June this year.

We have seen a philosophy from this government, essentially to rob Peter to pay Paul; we have seen that time and time again. We have seen the debt burden increase, we have seen fees and charges increase time after time, as have motor vehicle renewals, driver's licence fees and speeding fines. We have seen a blowout in the debt. In last year's budget, we were sitting at a trend debt of about $14 billion, and of course we are seeing the interest on that being paid every day.

As I always say in this house, when you look at the opportunity cost of the total amount of debt that we have, we can ask where will the money come from to service this debt and where will the money come from to provide South Australians the decent public services that we need? There is the option of going to the federal government for help, although the Premier does not seem to be keen on working in a collaborative manner with his federal counterparts, or we can invest in South Australia.

We have been waiting for these grand investment announcements in key infrastructure and economic producing assets from this government, but we have not seen them. We might see something in the coming budget. We might see the government invest in Globe Link which is the Liberal Party's plan for economic growth and investing in productive infrastructure. We actually might see the government invest in our youth and unemployed.

As we know, we have the highest unemployment rate in the nation. It has been like that for too long now, so we might finally see some investment in programs and skills-based training that might help the unemployed of South Australia, but I do not think we should hope for too much. Last year's budget predicted jobs growth in South Australia of only 0.75 per cent, and this was reaffirmed in the Mid-Year Budget Review. This is less than half the national growth rate of 1.8 per cent.

In the time I have left I would like to talk about some road infrastructure in my electorate. As I said before, there has been a lack of investment for many years in road infrastructure in my electorate. Investing in that main road corridor through Blackwood and Belair and down through Fullarton is one of the biggest issues for my community. That road corridor needs to be upgraded, the Blackwood roundabout needs to be upgraded and the Blythewood roundabout and the through road to Fullarton Road need to be upgraded.

The Liberal Party in government will commit to funding the first $20 million of the road management plan through Blackwood and the Mitcham Hills. This will be of great benefit to my constituents and those beyond in Flagstaff Hill, Aberfoyle Park, Happy Valley and those who use that road corridor on a daily basis. They will be great beneficiaries of the investment in infrastructure within the Mitcham Hills.

There is the road infrastructure, but there is also the public transport infrastructure that needs to be invested in. Time and time again we talk about park-and-ride facilities. There are so many opportunities for investment for this government to make South Australia a better place. What we would like to see is that actually happen, as opposed to what we normally get which is the blame game from the government about the inadequacies of the system and supposed failures of the federal Liberal government.

Mr WINGARD (Mitchell) (17:09): I, too, rise today to grieve on the Supply Bill. I spoke the other day about a number of key elements of the Supply Bill and what is impacting South Australia from the perspective of my portfolio areas of industry, sport, rec and racing.

Today, I would like to speak on those but also about some of the more vulnerable in our community who are being impacted by the actions of this government. We know we have the highest unemployment rate in the nation, and I think South Australians are getting the message now. They are sick and tired of it and they are sick and tired of what the government on the other side of this chamber is delivering. We have the highest unemployment rate in the nation on trend, at 6.7 per cent currently, and we have had that rate for more than two years; in fact, for 28 months we have been the worst state in the nation, and currently our unemployment figure is 7 per cent, as well, when it comes to raw figures. That is very disconcerting for all South Australians.

We know, again, the high cost of electricity. We have the most expensive electricity in the country and the least reliable supply. That is another big impact on South Australians and they are really starting to feel the pinch. I have spoken about those economic impositions on South Australians previously and how that is impacting on business, and an effect is that businesses are leaving South Australia as are a lot of South Australians, who are leaving our state to look for opportunities elsewhere. Opportunities are not being created in South Australia and that is, as I said, very disheartening for all South Australians.

What is more disheartening, what has come to light over recent times, is that there really has been a build-up of these incidents. The most recent one, of course, is Oakden, where we again see, under this state Labor government, our most vulnerable being impacted, and impacted in a very adverse way. We were here just before Easter and questions were being asked of the Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse from this side of the chamber about a report into some concerns about things that were happening at Oakden. In fact, the member for Davenport was asking these questions, and we were not getting any answers.

A report had been handed out on the Monday in the lead-up to Easter, but even on the Thursday these questions were not being answered. The minister was going to take the report away and have a look at it over Easter, as she ate some chocolate, and decide what was going on there. As we found out later, there were some alarming concerns, and the families involved were also rightly concerned about what was in this report. The fact is that the minister said she had staff looking at it, she then looked at it—and the Premier was, of course, away on holidays—but really nothing was done to satisfy the outcomes of this report.

It was a damning report that had some very alarming and concerning findings, but it took a very long time for the minister to come out and actually let the South Australian public know what was going on. Questions were asked on this side of the chamber but, unfortunately, yet again we got no answers. The families of the people involved in the Oakden facility were really let down, and the South Australian public was really let down as well. Ultimately, in this case, it was our most vulnerable people.

We know about the child protection fiasco, and we know the stories that have gone on there as well under this state Labor government. Again, vulnerable people are being let down by our state Labor government, and that is incredibly disappointing. We know about the chemo bungle as well, and Andrew Knox, and the disappointment and let down there with them not being made aware of what happened with their underdosing as far as chemotherapy was concerned. Again, vulnerable people are being let down. We also know that this government, and the big campaign to try to save the Repat, have actually turned their back on those people as well and let them down. We see a constant theme here of South Australia's most vulnerable being let down.

We looked at the economic side, which I talked about earlier and in a previous speech, and now we look at South Australia's most vulnerable, and we can see why South Australia is getting fed up with the state Labor government. The Premier really has to go. We need a change of government sooner rather than later because South Australians should not be putting up with this any longer.

While I have a few more minutes I would like to take the opportunity to talk about a couple of infrastructure projects and the federal budget, a federal budget that was handed down last night that had a lot in it for South Australians. The Turnbull government delivered a total of $10.6 billion in total payments to South Australia for 2017-18 across health, education, industry and infrastructure. Incorporated in there is a $100 million advanced manufacturing fund, which will go between Victoria and South Australia to help generate action out of the automotive industry which, as we know, is closing down later this year with jobs going. There was action and money put in place for a number of things there but, across the board, $10.6 billion in total payments for health, education, industry and infrastructure is quite generous.

We have talked about schools and a number of projects that are very important to South Australia, and there are some big infrastructure projects on the table that are happening now. We know that the federal government is putting in the lion's share for the north-south corridor at the Darlington interchange. We fought very hard for that, and it is great to have it happening. As I said, the feds are putting in the lion's share for that project. There is the Torrens to Torrens project, there is money for the APY lands and there is also the Flinders Link project.

One project I want to talk about where the federal government has put $40 million on the table is Oaklands crossing. I know that I speak about this a lot in this place, but it is a prime example of what the state Labor government has been doing and how it has been messing with people as far as projects are concerned in South Australia. To make this project happen, the state government says that they have some money saved from different bits and pieces, but they are still looking for that money that is saved. It is federal government money and they want it reinvested in the Oaklands project.

That is absolutely fine and dandy, but we need to justify where that money is. I have been asking them and I have been asking the feds where the money is. The feds say that the state Labor government have to put this request through Infrastructure Australia. That is where the funding comes from and that is where funding has to be ratified. There are projects where they say their savings are coming from, but they have not been built yet, so that is where verification is needed, but they have to go through Infrastructure Australia.

The minister is saying that, no, he is going to go around the back door and find another way through, that he is not going to go through Infrastructure Australia and that he does not need to do that. He thinks he can be exempt from the process that has been put in place by the federal government to make sure that all deals are fair and above board. The interesting thing about the minister in our state, the Minister for Infrastructure, is that his CEO is a former CEO of Infrastructure Australia, so you would think that we have a couple of people who know exactly how the system works. How the minister can sit there and say that he is going to bypass the Infrastructure Australia process is absolutely beyond me.

I heard him today pointing to other projects that did not go through Infrastructure Australia, or so he claims. My question to him is: that is all well and good, but why do you not go through the process you have been asked to go through to get this project advanced and ticked off? He will not do that. I have asked again to see the works that have been done, and I have asked to see the plans and the costings so that we know what is going on, but still those have not been put forward. He has not outlined whether the plan is now to take rail under or over, and that is what we are going to need to know so that we can get this grade separation process done.

I just wish the minister would get on with it. I wish he would do what the federal government is asking in relation to finding this money and putting the business case forward, as he was asked to do. I know that he is continuing to work with the federal government, and that is great, but I say: let's get on with it, let's get this work done and let's get everything out on the table. There is a project proposal report that needs to be done, and I would love to see that happen so that we know exactly where we are.

I am a bit disappointed that the minister is still messing around with this and not giving the federal government and Infrastructure Australia, the body that manages these projects, what they want. If he ticked all those boxes, we could get on and move on with it. Sadly, he is not doing so, and that just makes it confusing and disappointing for all the people in the community of the south because this project stretches way beyond my local community down south to Reynella and farther south again to the end of the Southern Expressway and to Seaford. It goes up into the Hills into the Blackwood area, where the member for Davenport sits, and it even stretches down to Glenelg and Colton. They are impacted by this intersection.

The excitement and the opportunities associated with this upgrade are absolutely endless. I look forward to working with the minister here locally if we can get this done, but he is keeping me very much in the dark. I speak regularly with the federal minister because this is a project we really need to get done as the opportunities and the upside that can come from this project could be very great for the southern region of our state and our city.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:18): I rise to speak to the Supply Bill grievance debate. I note there has been a bit of discussion today about the federal budget handed down by Scott Morrison and the Turnbull federal government last night, and I want to make a few points in regard to that. The simple fact is that the federal government is delivering $10.6 billion in total payments to South Australia in 2017-18 alone, across health, education industry and infrastructure, and in this budget there is $3.1 billion in infrastructure spending for South Australia.

Another thing that has happened is that $40 million over four years for supplementary road funding has been reinstated for local governments. This goes on top of what has been the largest single investment in any one state or territory in the history of the commonwealth: the $89 billion naval shipbuilding program, which will secure South Australia's future for generations by creating more than 5,000 direct jobs and thousands more across the supply chain. SAHMRI 2 has $68 million in 2017-18 to support the establishment of a proton beam therapy facility. There has been a bit of discussion about that. It is world-leading technology coming to this state.

We see education funding through schools in South Australia continuing to grow to record levels, with $16 billion being invested over 10 years. The federal government is supporting energy in this state with $36.6 million for energy infrastructure, plus $110 million equity funding for building solar thermal with storage in Port Augusta. Certainly, South Australian businesses will benefit from further assistance in the transition to high-end manufacturing through the $100 million advanced manufacturing fund. I have talked about a lot of those issues.

The commonwealth is also committed to regulatory reform to make it easier for businesses to operate, providing incentives to remove unnecessary restrictions on competition and cut red tape through a national partnership on regulatory reform. The commonwealth will make available $300 million in funding over two years, from 2017-18, for the delivery of reforms that drive Australia's economic performance, with a focus on small business deregulation. The budget also guarantees Medicare with the establishment of the Medicare guarantee fund, which can only be used to pay for Medicare and medicines. The National Disability Insurance Scheme will be fully funded to secure the future for South Australians with disabilities.

Major projects that are on the go in this state at the moment are 80 per cent federal funded. Today, we heard the transport minister expressing his faux disgust at not having more money fed to South Australia. It just shows how this state Labor government relies so heavily on that 80 per cent funding from the federal government for these major projects. These projects include the north-south corridor Darlington interchange, $496 million, with $198.7 million of that to be provided in 2017-18; the north-south corridor Torrens Road to River Torrens project, $400.5 million, with $105 million in 2017-18; the north-south corridor Northern Connector, $708 million, with $233.8 million to be provided in 2017-18; the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands, $85 million, with $23.8 million to be provided in 2017-18; and Flinders Link, $42.7 million, with $36.3 million to be provided in 2017-18.

Back in the 2016 federal election, the Australian government committed $56 million towards these three projects across the state: Oaklands crossing, the Lobethal B-double route and Marion Road planning projects. Certainly, the Lobethal B-double route will be vital for Thomas Foods abattoir at Lobethal. There is a $10 billion rail fund in the budget and projects such as the AdeLINK can apply for funding, pending the submission of a business case yet to be submitted by the state government. As indicated earlier, there is the reinstatement of supplementary road funding, which I know will please South Australian local governments.

Interestingly, I heard some comments by the Treasurer today on FIVEaa, where he was trying to tell the people of South Australia a simple untruth. He was saying that $500 million of federal money would have shored up Holden to stay in this state. That is simply not true at all. The head of General Motors in Detroit made the decision. They said that no amount of subsidy would keep them here in Australia, and that is a fact that anyone can check out. So, we have a government that is a bit loose with the truth, to say the least.

Yet we see funding that can be made available to this state, like the River Murray diversification funding, which I have talked about many times in this place, which would have put $25 million throughout South Australian river communities, as it did through communities in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. Those states all accepted their $25 million, so that was $75 million that went into projects to diversify communities from being so reliant on the River Murray.

But what happens here? We have a government that makes out they do so much for the River Murray, but when it comes down to actually supporting those river communities they just left them in the lurch and walked away. It was an absolute disgrace. They just walked away from those communities, from those projects that would have got those communities to build infrastructure to invest in jobs so they were not so reliant on direct irrigation industries on the River Murray.

It smacks in the face when you see the Treasurer, ministers and Premier Weatherill banging on about supposedly not getting enough funding when they have funding put in their hands and they just do not put it into the communities that drastically need it, yet they will be on their high horse and tell everyone who cares to listen, if they are still listening, about how much they do for the River Murray and River Murray communities.

It is no different from the government finally taking to ESCOSA the supply chain costs in regard to grain handling. This came out of a report from a committee that I established here in this house back after the harvest of 2010-11, and the lack of falling number machines fiasco with Viterra. I note that the member for Frome was on the committee as chair. One recommendation was that supply chain costs should be investigated by ESCOSA so that we could get an accurate picture of those real costs that are attributed right back to individual farmers. That report was tabled in 2012. It has taken five years—five years—to get that recommendation acted on with regard to grain supply chain costs for the thousands of farmers in this state. It is an absolute disgrace.

There are so many things that need support in my electorate. The Murray Bridge emergency department needs $3.5 million to get it up to speed. It has not had any major upgrade there for 30 or 40 years. So much can be done in my electorate. People are still looking for storm recovery funding but are missing out just because they are the wrong side of a council boundary. I have written to the minister about it, and I hope I get a favourable outcome for those few farmers who are in the Karoonda East Murray area.

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (17:29): I wish to take a couple of minutes to point out some deception that has been put about to try to deceive the people of South Australia that South Australia is not getting its fair share from the commonwealth government. The Treasurer came into the house today and made a ministerial statement, lamenting that, 'For South Australians, there are no new roads, no new rail, no new ports and no new trams.'

The Treasurer would have us believe that South Australia has been given a dud deal by the commonwealth in the budget that was handed down last night. I spoke on the Supply Bill yesterday and raised a number of shortfalls in funding by this government in South Australia. Then we had the commonwealth budget handed down last night and the Treasurer made this ministerial statement, trying to make the argument that South Australia has been treated badly.

Then we had question time today in the house when a number of particularly senior government ministers in some of the big spending portfolios—health, transport, education, etc.,—were asked Dorothy Dixers about the impact of the federal government's budget yesterday. Also, we saw this farce when ministers stood up and reported to the house that there was no extra funding in their portfolio area, trying again to give the impression that South Australia was indeed being given a bad deal by the commonwealth. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I hark back to the famous press conference where the Premier busted in on Josh Frydenberg's press conference, when he was announcing an electricity deal here in Adelaide, and the Premier said that this state had been treated so badly by the commonwealth. Again, nothing could be farther from the truth. The commonwealth has unfortunately been put in the position where it has had to treat South Australia as a mendicant state. The commonwealth has had to prop up South Australia.

I suspect that in the budget handed down by the state Treasurer in a few weeks' time it will be revealed that over half the revenues accounted for in his budget will be money directly sourced from the commonwealth. We will not know the exact figure until we see the Treasurer's budget. That is in stark contrast to the way every other state in our commonwealth is treated. Every other state lifts its own weight.

The figures I have in the back of my mind are dated and some years old now, but I know that the trend is that South Australia is going from bad to worse and that the percentage of the total state's budget derived from the commonwealth is increasing. A few years ago, I think it was the 2012-13 budget, it was about 49 per cent, whereas the average across the whole of Australia was around 40 per cent. It was certainly nowhere near 49 per cent. I strongly suspect that when the state budget is handed down we will see that over half the revenues accounted for in the South Australian budget will come directly from commonwealth payments.

The majority of those payments are through the GST system, so they are untied payments. They are not directed at specific purposes, they are not specific-purpose grants and they are not grants directed at particular parts of the budget, for instance health or education. They are untied, so the decisions on where that money is spent are purely made by the state government, by the cabinet and by the Treasurer. They make the decisions on where this money is spent, and I will come to some figures in a moment.

That is how ministers can stand up and say, 'Woe betide us. We've been given such a bad deal because we haven't been given any more money for education,' or, 'We haven't been given any more money for health.' The only truth in those statements is that, yes, the tied grants in various portfolio areas may not have been increased. In some cases, they have been, but they may not have been. The lie in this argument that has been put about by ministers of this government is that the total revenue from the commonwealth is not recognised. That is the lie.

The reality is that the amount of money that the state has to spend on any functions, and indeed the totality of the functions that the state is responsible for, is increasing. Not only is it increasing, it is increasing at a far greater rate than it is for any of the other states. South Australia is indeed being treated absolutely—absolutely—better than any other state in the nation.

I turn to the commonwealth budget papers. The total payments made to South Australia in the current financial year 2016-17 from the commonwealth are $9.856 billion. In the next financial year, in the budget that was handed down last night, that figure climbs to $10.576 billion. That is a huge increase—something like $700 million. Indeed, it is over $700 million. We have had these ministers stand up and lament that South Australia has been treated badly, but none of them will actually say that in totality South Australia is getting $700 million more than it did last year.

What are they going to do with that $700 million? If they do what they have done in recent years, they will squander it because that is what has happened. The total payments from the commonwealth to the states in the budget that was handed down yesterday increased year on year from the current financial year to the next financial year. The total increase is in the order of 2.7 per cent. That is the total of the payments going to all the states.

In the case of South Australia, that increase is 7.3 per cent—more than double the average increase enjoyed by the states as a whole. It is more than double, yet we have the Premier and his senior ministers trot out this alarmist lie that South Australia has been treated badly. South Australia has been treated extraordinarily well by the commonwealth. The bad treatment that South Australia is suffering is in the decision-making of this state government. This state government manages to squander the largesse that is showered upon us by the commonwealth.

Of that $10.576 billion that South Australia will receive in the next financial year, some $6.3 billion will be in GST payments; that is, totally untied grants. It is $6.3 billion and that is up from $5.93 billion—$370 million more than South Australia received in GST in the current financial year. The temerity of this government to claim that we have been treated badly by the commonwealth is only overshadowed by this government's own incompetence.

The only thing that I am happy about with the state of politics in this state is that come March next year there will be an election. For the first time in over 40 years, it will be fought on fair boundaries and, in my opinion, there is a very, very strong chance that we will see a new government sitting on the government benches. That augurs very well for every South Australian.

Motion carried.

Third Reading

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Minister for Education and Child Development, Minister for Higher Education and Skills) (17:39): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.