Motions

Paradise Interchange

Mr TARZIA (Hartley) (11:30): I move:

That this house—

(a) condemns the South Australian Labor government for breaking its promise to the people of Paradise and surrounding areas to upgrade park-and-ride facilities at the Paradise Interchange;

(b) condemns the government for abandoning this pre-election commitment and stripping essential services from the residents of the north-eastern suburbs;

(c) notes that the Liberal Party will restore funding to upgrade Paradise Interchange; and

(d) calls on the government to fulfil its election commitment and immediately restore the funding to upgrade the Paradise Interchange.

Users of the Paradise Interchange and nearby residents are sick and tired of being duped by the lies of this state Labor government. Travelling down Sudholz and Darley roads in the morning commute, it is clear that there is a parking issue at the Paradise Interchange. Cars are often stacked up along the sides of the busy main road. It is an issue that has particularly worsened in recent times, with overflows of parking going into residential side streets. The Paradise Interchange provides an efficient transport service to the north-eastern area, but it has been hindered greatly by a lack of parking.

It is all too common for commuters to feel the tension and anxiety in the morning commute. They drive to the interchange in the morning, hoping to make use of the O-Bahn service, only to find that the parking lots are often full. Unfortunately for them, the common solution is to park along the previously mentioned Darley and Sudholz roads or in the side streets. It puts commuters at risk as they exit their vehicles during peak-hour traffic and it creates congestion in neighbouring streets. One concerned resident who works nearby recently told me of his fears that it may only be a matter of time before someone is seriously hurt when they try to cross the road from the overflow of car parking across that road.

Many years ago, in the May 2011 budget, the state government announced funding for increased parking and bike storage, and they have continued to ignore this area. No additional parking spaces since then have actually been delivered at the interchange. Along with the member for Morialta, I was involved in lobbying the government through the collection of over 1,000 signatures, and over 300 in a recent petition, one of which was tabled, calling for a solution to the issue. I have also delivered a number of speeches to this place following years of community discussion on the matter. I have been out to the interchange and spoken to commuters, as well as mailing residents who live in the area. I have even launched an online campaign that has enabled many residents to join the conversation.

Even in the 2013-14 state budget papers, it seemed that there may have been an actual solution that this government may have delivered, that it would only be around the corner. Looking at Budget Paper 5, Capital Investment Statement, in the 2013-14 budget, I note that the state Labor government at the time committed $18.1 million for additional park-and-ride parking spaces at Mount Barker, Tonsley and Paradise interchanges, as well as upgraded passenger facilities in the City of Adelaide. Also included in the budget and on the same page was funding for upgrades to the O-Bahn interchange. This included proposed expenditure of $10 million to increase the capacity of existing park-and-ride facilities and provide more efficient and customer-focused passenger services and facilities.

Clearly, Paradise Interchange is yet to receive additional parking spaces. It is noted in the Annual Report Card 2012-13 of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure's planning strategy for South Australia that a significant major infrastructure project would include planning for new park-and-ride facilities at Mount Barker, Clovelly Park, St Clair, Tea Tree Plaza and Paradise Interchange. That is on page 14 of the DPTI Annual Report Card 2012-13.

On page 29, the document further states that there would be 330 car parks added at Paradise Interchange. Parking at the interchange remains a huge issue, yet the state Labor government this year committed to building park-and-ride facilities at Klemzig and Tea Tree Plaza, choosing instead to snub Paradise Interchange. It is almost like they did it on purpose.

I am continuously badgered by the Minister for Transport, and also the Treasurer, for voting down a toxic car park tax, which I am told was the reason for funding being pulled initially. We saw in the budget papers that money was allocated to Paradise Interchange for car parking before the car park tax was proposed. It is curious that funds were allocated before the car park tax birth in the 2012, 2013 and 2014 budgets. It is even more curious that now, without the aid of a car park tax, the Klemzig and Tea Tree Plaza interchanges have been allocated funds for additional park-and-ride facilities.

I quote one nearby resident's comments from an article in the East Torrens Messenger on 28 June 2017:

It doesn't make sense to me that Klemzig got funding and Paradise didn't…This is a much bigger [challenge].

I could not agree more. In the lead-up to the last election, the previous member for Hartley also gave false hope to the residents, and I quote an excerpt from his letter:

I would like to thank you for the significant investment being made to improve the O-Bahn especially the car parking at Paradise Interchange.

He goes on that they have campaigned for many years for these improvements and that they are pleased that the state government has responded with an investment of $17 million, yet we still see the pressing need for more car parking at Paradise Interchange.

While the state Labor government promised to fund improved car parking at the interchange prior to the last election, they have failed to deliver. The community deserves better and we will not stop until our community gets its fair share. I am here today to remind our local people that it is only under a Liberal Party that the people of Paradise and surrounding areas will get the extra car parking facilities that they want and need. We will bring the community with us and we will get this car parking done.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (11:36): I rise to speak against this motion for one very good reason and that is because the member for Hartley is being, as he has been for the best part of three years now, deliberately misleading in the substance of this motion. He has, along with his colleagues on that side of the chamber, engaged in a campaign to manipulate the facts, to alter the truth and to paint a picture for his constituents that seeks to absolve himself and his Liberal Party colleagues of the blame that rests fairly and squarely on their shoulders for the reason why improved car parking facilities at the Paradise O-Bahn interchange have not yet been delivered.

Had the government been able to deliver the mandate that it sought and received at the 2014 state election, make no mistake, that car park would be built and today, on a working day, it would be being used. People who complain to the member for Hartley, who complain to me, who complain to the council, who complain amongst themselves about the inadequacy of the car parking facilities, have one person to thank; indeed, they have just under two dozen people to thank and that is those sitting opposite.

We made it absolutely clear in 2013 that we would be going to the state election promising a transport development levy. It is very clear what that development levy would have funded. It would have raised revenue so that we could invest in improved transport facilities. We were very clear that those revenues would pay for improvements to public transport, specifically, but not limited to, park-and-ride facilities. In looking at those park-and-ride facilities, we were very clear that Paradise Interchange would be the recipient of the benefit of those revenues.

But, just as we have seen with the craven, weak behaviour of the Liberal Party over the banking levy, as soon as a corporate vested interest makes their wishes known, they fold and they get in behind those corporate vested interests to the disservice and to the damage of South Australians and communities around our state. That is exactly what has happened here. Just so that they could protect the interests of a few car park operators here in the CBD, the hundreds of people who are finding themselves with unsatisfactory parking facilities at the Paradise O-Bahn interchange have been dudded.

We made absolutely clear to the member for Hartley before he voted on that state budget in 2014 the repercussions of his actions if he voted with his colleagues to vote down that measure. The responsibility rests on his shoulders because it is a non-binding caucus over there. He had the freedom to part company on that vote with his colleagues, to put a stake in the ground and say to his constituents, 'I agree with what you're saying about the Paradise Interchange. It is important, it does need action, and on this matter I disagree with my parliamentary colleagues. I think we should deliver better parking services and facilities at the Paradise Interchange. I think I should make sure I'm doing my best to make sure that we've got improved facilities. I may not even like the concept of this levy, but in this case it's worth doing. In this instance, it's worth doing because I know the benefits it's going to deliver for my constituency.'

The Treasurer and I stood out there at the Paradise Interchange, and we made it abundantly clear that if he voted with his colleagues, if his colleagues in this chamber and upstairs voted down the state budget and the transport development levy with it, the Paradise Interchange would not be improved, would not be developed and there would not be any extra car parking facilities. It was made abundantly clear to the member for Hartley, and it was made clear to him before that vote.

And what did he do? He pretended the issue did not exist. He put his head in the sand. He walked away from the commitments he had given his electors at the 2014 election to stand up for their best interests and he sold them out. He sold them out over the Paradise Interchange just as he is selling South Australians, along with his colleagues, over the banking levy, just as—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: It is ironic that we should have two regional members of parliament on the Liberal side start interjecting when I point out the uncomfortable truth to them that the banks that they are out defending are the ones that closed branches in their electorates.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, sit down. The member for Morialta has a point of order.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Finniss!

Mr GARDNER: Point of order: the minister is being irrelevant.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will ask the minister to come back to the substance of the debate.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I appreciate the discomfort about talking about—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, the substance of—

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —three branches which have closed in Chaffey.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Three branches in 18 months.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, minister!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: And you just spruik digital banking.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, I am on my feet.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order on my left!

Mr GARDNER: Point of order: standing order 137. In defying your ruling, the minister now invites being thrown out.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It was very close, wasn't it? I am going to listen to the minister and draw him back to the substance of the debate.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Just as there has been a pattern of selling out South Australians from this Liberal opposition, so did the member for Hartley sell out his constituency—

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Chaffey!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —by voting against the upgrade of the park-and-ride facilities at Paradise Interchange—

Mr Gardner: Point of order.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: He sold them out.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! We have a point of order.

Mr GARDNER: Standing order 127: imputing improper motive and making personal reflections on another member. The minister now has the trifecta of breaches of standing orders.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We do need to come back to the substance of the debate.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Well, Deputy Speaker, the point of order I would raise is that member for Morialta repeatedly interjects and interrupts the business of this chamber—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —which is a direct breach of standing orders.

Mr GARDNER: Point of order: the Speaker has insisted on referring bogus points of order as warranting a warning, that being a bogus point of order without reference to a standing order.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The house's time is precious. I am not sure that the best interests of the state and the house are being served here this morning. I am drawing you back to the substance of the debate.

An honourable member: He keeps interjecting with bogus points of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, order! My role, as you know, is to prevent quarrels. I see a quarrel, so it is up to you whether we stop altogether or we do not quarrel.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Both sides need to behave.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: The member for Hartley deliberately voted in full knowledge that, if he voted against this budget in 2014, his electors would not receive an upgrade to Paradise Interchange. He was warned about that specifically.

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Adelaide, I do understand why the Speaker hears your voice.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: The Treasurer and I stood at the Paradise Interchange and made the choice abundantly clear for the member for Hartley—abundantly clear—and, knowing that, he came into this chamber and voted to ensure that those facilities were not upgraded. That was the choice the member for Hartley made and that is why we distributed materials. We told all those people who are forced to park out on Darley Road that the member for Hartley had, quite literally, sold them down the Torrens River. He had made sure that they did not have the upgrade to their facilities which the Labor government had promised them, which we had devised a way to fund and which we had committed to delivering.

For the last three years, the member for Hartley has carried on this campaign of crocodile tears about why his behaviour and his voting record in this parliament has denied his constituency the benefit the Labor government was prepared to deliver. That is exactly what has occurred over these three years. The horror for the member for Hartley, now that we are some eight months out, is that his constituency is going to be reminded chapter and verse about how his actions have caused them not to be able to park in upgraded car parking facilities. That is the truth of the matter.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order on my left!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: He can gaze down at his navel all he likes, but those are the facts.

Mr Whetstone: Bring on Steven Rypp.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Chaffey, I warn you for the first time. Question time looms, and I want you all here.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: I have met with the City of Campbelltown, I have met with their mayor, and they said, 'What are we going to do in light of the member for Hartley's intransigence?' In fact, they were not his words, to be fair: they were mine. Yes, I will concede that: they were my words. What are we going to do with this situation? It is intractable for the council, and doubly so because some 12 or 18 months ago there was a private proponent, a developer, who wanted to develop some multistorey residential dwellings on Gameau Road, I believe it was, facing Paradise Interchange. That was resoundingly defeated at the council development approval level, mostly on the back of a campaign run by local residents who did not want to see that level of development and did not want to put up with traffic issues on their local street of Gameau Road.

We are now also in this intractable situation where not only have the actions of the member for Hartley denied people who use Paradise Interchange improved park-and-ride facilities but we also seem to be struggling for a solution on the same side of Darley Road as the interchange for multistorey car parking facilities because the local residents will not put up with the traffic that comes in with that. I would be prepared to work through a solution but, while we have a member for Hartley who is hell-bent on denying his constituency the benefits of better parking facilities, I am not sure what the way forward is.

Time expired.

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (11:48): This is a very important motion. The fact is that Paradise Interchange is inadequate and needs to be improved. This government promised that it would improve it, and it has failed to uphold its promise. Though I have liked the minister for a long time as an individual, his speech has disappointed me greatly because it has laid open and bare for everyone to see the rotten, spiteful heart that defines this government.

It is actually quite an extraordinary claim that the minister has just made. He said that a government, whose sworn duty is to represent the people of South Australia and act in their best interests, made a political decision before the budget measure was debated in 2014. They said that, unless another member of this house ignored what they considered to be the merits of that budget measure, the merits of that legislation and voted for what the government said they should vote for, the government would spitefully respond by taking it out upon the residents of the eastern suburbs and the north-eastern suburbs—the residents of Hartley, the residents of Morialta, the residents of Newland, the residents of Florey—by not providing the infrastructure that that community needs and by not providing the infrastructure that the South Australian people deserve.

That is an extraordinary thing for the minister to have said. They have demanded that a member of this house ignore what they have sworn to do, that is, to take each piece of legislation on its merits or else the government will take vengeance upon their community and not provide the infrastructure that is required by that community. It is an extraordinary thing. It is a spiteful thing. It is a rotten thing.

I have to say, in a week that has been unusual, for me to say 'unprecedented', it is unprecedented for the minister to be so brash and so brazen in flaunting and boasting about the fact that he does not give a damn about what the people of the eastern suburbs or the people of the north-east need. People who live in Torrens, Newland, Florey, Morialta and Hartley use the Paradise Interchange on a regular basis, but their interests and their needs have been suborned to the Treasurer and the Minister for Infrastructure's political decision that they want to wreak maximum political advantage out of this false nexus they have drawn between the car park tax and the Paradise Interchange upgrade.

It is a false nexus. Let me take the house through why it is a false nexus. Firstly, the member for Florey, in debate in this chamber in 2012, I think, in a motion not entirely dissimilar to this one—although it did not refer to broken election promises because at that stage there had not been an election promise—in happier days between her and the Labor Party, outlined what was then the government's position.

At one stage in the debate she said I would be happy to hear what she had to say next, and I was happy to hear what she had to say next, because she then outlined that the Labor government had a plan that was coming in place to deliver an improvement to the interchange at Paradise. She was representing the minister. She was the Labor speaker on that motion and she said that the government was going to fix Paradise. That was the first instance.

The second instance was that the Paradise Interchange upgrade was promised by Grace Portolesi, the then Labor member for Hartley. The third instance was, as the member for Hartley has outlined, that the Paradise Interchange upgrade was included in the budget papers as an infrastructure measure that was going to take place.

The fact that at the same time in 2014 the budget papers included that infrastructure increase as well as the car park tax is not in any other way contingent. The Liberal Party had a clear mandate to vote against the car park tax, having taken our opposition to the people of South Australia and our having been voted by the people of South Australia to sit in this house and undertake what we had promised to do. Not only that but we were also supported by 53 per cent of the population, of course.

The fact is that the car park tax funding that did not come through has not prevented the government from undertaking other park-and-ride facilities. In fact, other park-and-ride upgrades at Klemzig and Tea Tree Plaza were in place prior to the existence of the car park tax. They were promised prior to the last election and they took place. Since the car park tax was defeated, other infrastructure measures to park-and-ride facilities have been promised. Even in this very budget, we have had welcome improvements to park-and-ride facilities that are going to be undertaken at Klemzig and Tea Tree Plaza.

I have to say that the member for Hartley and I, as well as the Mayor of Campbelltown and others, have asked, 'Why on earth do they keep missing Paradise out?' The Minister for Infrastructure, perhaps inspired by the hubris of his own prowess in the debate, has laid bare the answer: it is a question of spite. This is now a government that brags about making decisions on infrastructure projects out of spite. The minister can do what he wants to me or the member for Hartley, but he is doing this to all the people of the north-eastern suburbs. He is betraying the electors of Newland, Florey and Torrens. He is betraying the constituents of our seats. He is betraying the people of South Australia and his oath to act in their best interests as a minister.

The government's duty is to govern in the best interests of South Australians. It is one they have clearly lost interest in. The minister says that the government had a mandate to introduce a car park tax, a mandate that about one in three South Australians voted for. What an extraordinary claim! The fact is that when the minister comes out to Paradise Interchange and gives politically grandstanding press conferences at which he says that because of one member's actions on a piece of legislation the government has made a decision that they are never going to support a piece of infrastructure in the member's area, that is an extraordinary abrogation of duty and it is a betrayal of the people of South Australia.

It almost seems trivial by comparison, but it was a pretty embarrassing mistake, so I will go there as well regarding the minister's complaints about the Gameau Road development. I draw it to his attention because it was not the Campbelltown council that knocked back the Gameau Road development, it was the Development Assessment Commission, which is the government's own instrument for overriding what local councils potentially want to do. So, if he has an issue with the Development Assessment Commission, I suggest he takes it up with the Minister for Planning.

What we should have been talking about—and I have been distracted for seven minutes by the minister's extraordinary statements—is the need for this car park improvement at Paradise Interchange. I have previously identified that the seven minutes a day that are proposed to be saved on average to commuters by the $160 million O-Bahn tunnel is an average. If you are on the O-Bahn before 8 o'clock in the morning, before 8.30 in the morning, it is a lot less than that. It is only in the rush hour that that saving is really going to come into effect.

That seven minutes a day is less than the time it takes me to walk from my car in the paddock across the field to the platform and back. To do that, you walk across Darley Road, which is a significant road, as members from the north-eastern suburbs would know. The member for Hartley certainly knows. It is the boundary between Hartley and Morialta at the moment and soon it will be entirely within Hartley. I use that pretty much every parliamentary sitting week when I catch the O-Bahn, which I do pretty much every parliamentary sitting week.

It is a really dangerous road to cross. I am 38 years old and I do not consider myself to have movement difficulties, although it is not as easy as it used to be. I have crossed that road and been quite fearful of my situation. If they are parking across the road, it means they have got to the O-Bahn after 8 o'clock because there is never a parking space in the car park after 8 o'clock and there is often not a parking space in the car park after 7.45. The government has leased this space from the Paradise Community Church—the Influencers Church, as it is now—which is another 200 metres further away from the paddock.

The paddock next to the skate park, between the skate park and the Influencers Church, is where people park their car. Anyone getting to Paradise after 7.45 or 8 o'clock definitely parks their car there. Crossing that road is dangerous; I have been genuinely fearful myself. Some people go above 60 km/h, and they often do after they have been banked up in traffic to the north or south of Paradise Interchange, particularly north and south of the river.

If you are running late for work, if you are trying to get across the road in a hurry, it is damn dangerous at the moment. I am very fearful. I join the member for Hartley on this. I am very fearful that at some stage there is going to be a terrible accident. We are very lucky and grateful that nothing has happened so far. The member for Hartley and I between us over the last eight years have collected thousands of signatures on petitions for this to be improved. One very important fact remains to be said: the Liberal Party, if elected to government in March 2018, has committed money and will deliver an improvement to the Paradise Interchange car park and I cannot wait for that to happen.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (11:58): Despite the argument we hear from the government that the member for Hartley is entirely responsible for the Paradise Interchange not being built because he voted against the car park tax, I put it to you that this decision not to build by this government was made the minute the numbers came in on election night in the seat of Hartley and they saw that they had lost the seat of Hartley. That was when the decision was made.

The decision was made then to punish the people of Hartley for removing the former member for Hartley and replacing her with the current member for Hartley. In other words, moving from a Labor candidate to a Liberal candidate as their member of parliament. That is when the decision was made by this government that they were not going to build the Paradise Interchange, and what was it based on? It was based on spite. We heard that confirmed by the minister.

It reminded me of a Seinfeld episode where Jerry Seinfeld bought a crested jacket. It was an expensive jacket, but he decided that he did not quite like the salesman and wanted to teach the salesman a lesson, so he went back to the store and said, 'Excuse me, I would like to return this jacket.' The salesperson said, 'Certainly, may I ask why?' Jerry Seinfeld said, 'For spite.' The teller said, 'For spite?' Seinfeld said, 'That's right. I don't care for the salesman who sold it to me.'

We now have a situation where the government does not care for the member for Hartley because the Labor member for Hartley is not there anymore. The teller said, 'I don't think you can return the item for spite.' Seinfeld said, 'What do you mean? The teller said, 'Well, if there was some problem with the garment, if it was unsatisfactory in some way, we could do it for you, but I'm afraid that spite doesn't fit into any of the conditions of our refund.' I put that to the government: spite is not a reason to deprive the people in the electorate of Hartley the car park that you promised them time and time again.

We have fixed that problem. We have promised to build that car park. I cannot recall a week that has gone by that the member for Hartley has not reminded me of the commitment we have made to build that Paradise Interchange car park.

Mr Pengilly: A good local member.

Mr PISONI: He is an excellent local member and very, very focused on getting the best outcomes for his constituents. We will build that car park, not just because of the advocacy of the member for Hartley but because it is needed and it is the right thing to do.

The O-Bahn is an enormous success. Remember that it was in the three short years of the Tonkin government, from 1979 to 1982, that the O-Bahn was brought to South Australia—an extraordinary piece of infrastructure that has served the people of the north-east extremely well. We are enormous fans of the O-Bahn here. We own the O-Bahn. We brought the O-Bahn. The Liberal Party brought the O-Bahn to South Australia.

We need to do everything we possibly can to ensure that more people use that trunk route that gets them into the city from Tea Tree Plaza, Paradise or Klemzig very quickly. The more people who use it and the more times we can get buses running on that O-Bahn, the more traffic we will keep off North-East Road and Lower North-East Road and the less congestion we will have for the buses that are using those roads, for other public transport users and for those who are still using their cars to get into the city.

We support the car park as proposed by the member for Hartley. We support his advocacy for his constituents and, again, I congratulate them. After 3½ years, they are only really just getting used to having a local member who services them, so congratulations to you, member for Hartley, on what you have been able to achieve, on the profile that you have given the people in the seat of Hartley in the Liberal party room and on how you continue to advocate for them.

Many shadow ministers, when they see the member for Hartley coming along in the corridors, try to go into an office before they get to him because they do not want to be bailed up about another issue that he wants us to look at in his electorate. He is a very, very strong advocate for his electorate, and I am sure that the people of Hartley would like to see him returned. I certainly hope that he is returned next year at the election because the people of Hartley need an advocate of the calibre of the current member for Hartley.

Look at the example from the other side: you are either with them or you are against them, 'How dare those people of Hartley decide that they wanted better representation than they had with Grace Portolesi, voting for the current member for Hartley. How dare they. We will punish them for that.' Just as in the Seinfeld episode, where spite is no reason to return a jacket, spite is no reason to deprive the people of Hartley of what you have promised them year after year.

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (12:05): I rise to support the member for Hartley's motion regarding the park-and-ride facility or better parking at Paradise Interchange. It is incredibly disappointing to see that the government can find money for Klemzig and Tea Tree Gully, yet it is again ignoring Paradise. We heard the member for Morialta describe how dangerous it is parking there, and the length of time that it takes to walk to and from your car. Imagine if you are a female, walking there late at night. Even at 5.30pm, it is dark these days in winter, so there is also the danger aspect of not fixing the parking facilities.

This is a very spiteful government. This spiteful government, although twice promising to electrify the Gawler line, cancelled it again for the second time. It has found it again in this budget. It cancelled it again before the 2014 election and found, miraculously, $160 million to cut a big tunnel through Rymill Park to save 2½ minutes in the morning and 3½ minutes in the afternoon for the people of the north-eastern suburbs because they were in marginal seats.

This government does act out of spite. Every decision it makes is politically motivated. It is never about the best interests of the people, so it is very pleasing to have such a strong advocate in the member for Hartley, who has been advocating in our party room to ensure that his constituents do have safety, a safe place to park and time is saved for them.

We did not need a $160 million tunnel to save six minutes. We could have saved more time by fixing the park-and-rides and also by fixing the line. The bus can only run at 80 km/h because the track has not been maintained properly. There are lots of things that could have been done that would have saved the same, if not more, amount of time for O-Bahn users. We welcome the O-Bahn. It was a Liberal initiative. It is a great piece of infrastructure and it needs to be maintained. We did not need a tunnel through the Parklands.

The time we have lost driving on Hackney Road for the last year is far more than six minutes in the morning and night. Hundreds of thousands of car users are losing time in their day because of this apparent upgrade. I commend the member for Hartley for his advocacy and doing the right thing for the people of his electorate. The Liberal Party, if elected in 2018, will ensure that that goes ahead.

Mr TARZIA (Hartley) (12:08): The facts are clear that, despite the billions of dollars that the government currently controls, this part of South Australia is not a priority for them. If it were a priority for them, they would have delivered the added car park facilities that they had promised before the election, but they have not.

It is very clear that the only way the residents of Paradise and surrounding areas, and users of this interchange, will get the car park facilities they have asked for and that they deserve, is by voting Liberal at the next election and returning the Liberal Party to government in South Australia. When we are elected to government, we will fix the car parking issues at Paradise Interchange. I thank my colleagues on the side of the chamber for their submissions and I commend this motion to the house.

The house divided on motion:

Ayes 16

Noes 20

Majority 4

Motion thus negatived.