Bills

Supply Bill 2018

Second Reading

Debate resumed.

Dr HARVEY (Newland) (21:50): I rise today to very happily support the Supply Bill to keep the government going from the end of the financial year until the budget is brought forward in September. In total, this is a budget of about $6.6 billion. This is taxpayers' money. This is the people of South Australia's money and, as a member of this government, I am very confident that as Liberals we take that fact very seriously. It is not our money; it is the people of South Australia's money and so we will be ensuring that all of the decisions that are made are done in the interests of the people of South Australia.

This is in contrast, I suppose, to those in recent times who have perhaps treated taxpayers' money in a slightly different way. There have certainly been a lot of vanity projects and ideological obsessions—a lot of things that might perhaps make people feel very warm and fuzzy inside, but do very little to actually improve the lives of South Australians and that are really lacking in practical application. The other principle we come to is only to take as much as we absolutely need to do the things that we absolutely need. We made it very clear before the election what that would be and we are going to be very consistent on that.

We listened to what the people of South Australia wanted from our government and there were three main themes: they wanted more jobs, they wanted lower costs and they wanted better services. Lower costs was one of the major issues that came up during the campaign in Newland. I am pleased to say that we have quite a number of commitments on that part to reduce the cost-of-living pressures on both households and businesses. The emergency services levy is an important part of that. Shortly after the 2014 election, the previous government, without any warning, massively increased this impost on households and businesses. This was an extraordinary increase, hurting so many people. We will be reversing that—we will be cutting it. This will be giving back $90 million a year to households and businesses.

This is really critical tax relief for households, businesses, farmers and for so many other people in the community. On top of that, what this also does is help deal with this trust deficit that was left behind by the previous government by doing something that they did not say they were going to do, while we will be doing exactly what we said we were going to. In general, the idea on this side is that we would rather be giving taxpayers' money back to taxpayers, who are best placed to spend their own money, rather than us fleecing them whenever the opportunity arises.

Another important policy on the topic of cost of living is, of course, capping council rates. This is a policy that we have been talking and campaigning on for quite a long time. We will be capping council rate increases, keeping them to the smallest amount possible, matching the local government index. If councils really need to increase rates beyond that, then they have to make that case and that is what our policy will allow them to do. This will, of course, be done by an independent regulator.

The other important part—and this was probably one of the really hot-button issues in terms of cost of living—was the cost of electricity, which has skyrocketed in recent times. It was quite incredible when, particularly towards the end of the financial year in June last year, overnight, after announcements of large increases, every single person I doorknocked that next day was talking about power prices. So this is a major focus for us.

We have put together a positive plan that will tackle the problems that have led to these increases in costs by essentially dealing with the extraordinary fluctuations that have been in our generation and supply, given that we had lost so much of our base load power and with inadequate storage to counter that fluctuation.

We will, of course, be providing a subsidy for households to install batteries with their solar panels so that they can store their own power when they are out during the day and then use it into the evening, taking that peak out of the evening load. We will also be helping to support the building of a new interconnector to New South Wales. This is important when there is no wind or sun in South Australia, and we can be importing power from interstate, but when the opposite is true and there is lots of wind and sun we can be exporting that power interstate, helping to stabilise our local grid.

This issue is not only hurting households it also had a major impact on local businesses. In fact, there is a local fish and chip shop within Newland that cited increasing power prices directly as the reason for laying off three casual staff. This is a case where not only was it impinging on their ability to do business and hurting households but three people lost an opportunity to earn an income for themselves.

In a business like that, they were even having to go as far as turning off a lot of their display refrigeration equipment, which, of course, draws a lot of power, and storing everything in standard fridges. So they were really hurt by that. It is very important that this issue is dealt with and that we have a comprehensive plan that deals with the issue on all the different fronts to ensure that we will deliver the reductions in price that businesses and households really need.

The other major issue for Newland, and one that we have committed to resolving, is the cuts around Modbury Hospital. A lot of people in the local area rely on the local hospital for services, and the previous government, under Transforming Health, removed a lot of those services. We have committed to bringing them back. We have committed $110 million—$20 million of that is for reinstating the high dependency unit, which will allow for more complex procedures to be performed at Modbury Hospital. We will also be investing in a number of other infrastructure improvements, including a purpose-built palliative care unit, a general refurbishment of the hospital building itself, a new acute medical ward and acute surgical ward, and a number of other things as well.

This is really critical. It was a major issue for the local area and another example of where I think a lot of people felt betrayed by a government that was presenting a particular image, or attempting to present a particular image, but really doing something very different at the same time. Having that occur for such a long time, I think, has been responsible for a lot of degradation in the trust of politicians in general.

One thing I came across quite frequently is that we would go out campaigning and committing to people the things that we were going to be doing if we were successful in government and many people would come back and say, 'That's great. We agree with that, if you do it.' There was this real sense that people would say one thing before an election and do something very different afterwards, and this is where we absolutely will be different. We must be very different and we absolutely will be. I look forward to assisting in the delivery of all our commitments.

A number of very specific commitments, on top of the Modbury Hospital, include, of course, the Tea Tree Gully sports hub, which is where the Tea Tree Gully netball and tennis clubs train and where the tennis club plays. We will be investing in additional courts at that site because at the moment the courts there are completely over capacity, and kids are being turned away from those clubs. There is of course Tea Tree Gully Gymsports, a great local club, the largest gymnastics club in South Australia with 2,000 members. We will support and help them put a new spring floor into their facility.

We will also support the upgrade to the Kersbrook Primary School crossing on Kersbrook Road. For a number of years now the local governing council has been concerned that the crossing there has not been as safe as it should be, so we have committed to additional signage and lighting to make the crossing more visible to cars as they are coming through. As the member for King alluded, we will also be upgrading the South Australia Districts Netball Association courts at Golden Grove to make sure the car park there is safer so that cars are able to more efficiently move in and out of there.

The policies the Marshall Liberal government is implementing are making and will continue to make real differences to the lives of South Australians. Little by little we will be saving, which the government can deliver to households and businesses, and eventually this will really add up to make a very real difference to people's lives. We will be as careful with taxpayers' money as absolutely possible, rather than see it as our own plaything to maintain our own positions. I am very happy to support this Supply Bill and look forward to assisting in the delivery of the Liberal government's agenda over the next few years.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.

A quorum having been formed:

The SPEAKER: Could members be seated or leave so that I can see who would like the call. The member for Giles.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (22:04): It is great to have such an extensive audience, given the numbers who have been in here recently. I am sure that you are all waiting with bated breath for the comments that are to come. Of course I rise to support supply, as we all do. I reflect upon the comments from the member for West Torrens that we are essentially signing off on a blank cheque. A lot has been said in the lead-up to the election, and a lot has been said in the Address in Reply speech and the Supply Bill speeches about the commitments of the new government, but there is still a lack of clarity about just what is going to be done across a whole range of areas.

We have heard on a number of occasions tonight about the great work the government is going to do when it comes to the ESL. It has been mentioned that there is a trust deficit. However, there seems to be a view that the changes that took place back in 2014 all happened in some sort of vacuum. Of course they did not happen in some sort of a vacuum. They happened as a direct result of the Abbott government.

If anybody is talking about a trust deficit, you have to look at what the Abbott government did when elected. It made a number of commitments in relation to education and health and the agreements that had been entered into with all the states. In its first budget it just walked away from those agreements; it just tore up those agreements. It was not just Labor governments that were deeply upset about the action on the part of the Abbott government; it was also Liberal governments. In that budget, nationally we saw $80 billion ripped out of expenditures for health and education in Australia. Of course, that had a marked impact on South Australia as well.

The health agreement that was walked away from was something that was essential. The National Health Reform Agreement was an attempt to get things back on an even keel when it came to the health system both in this state and nationally. That is because the increases in costs associated with health, associated with the public health system and other associated elements to do with health, were rising far higher than CPI.

They were rising for a whole range of reasons, including an ageing population, which in a sense is a measure of success as a nation. We have one of the highest longevity rates now in the world, which is a good thing, but along with that comes a range of challenges, not least of which is a number of chronic diseases, a number of diseases associated with age. There have also been huge advances in what we are able to do. That in some ways has saved money on one hand, but it has also massively increased costs on the other.

There was an attempt by the federal Labor government, in cooperation with Liberal state governments and Labor governments, to do the right thing, to recognise the real cost increases when it came to the health system nationally. Abbott broke the commitments that he made. The Liberal Party broke the commitments that it made when it went into that election when it came to health and education. That had a significant impact here in South Australia. The amount of money that was ripped away in one fell swoop was incredibly significant.

We have seen a return of some of that funding, but it is only a fraction of what was originally taken away. We are still today living with the consequences of those Liberal Party cuts, of those Abbott cuts. That is something that the new government is going to have to take into mind when it does eventually frame its budget and as it spends over the coming period in the lead-up to the budget.

I will be paying attention to a number of things in my electorate when it comes to seeing where money is going to be spent. On this side of the chamber, you get to look up at Sir Thomas Playford. If not for Sir Thomas Playford, I acknowledge that I might not be in South Australia. The role that he played back in the 1950s in doing the foundational work to secure—against some reluctance by BHP—an integrated steelworks in Whyalla, which was commissioned back in 1965, was commendable.

It is interesting to look back on those years and the bipartisan approach that was taken to secure that major investment in South Australia. Indeed, it was a major investment that for a time led to Whyalla being the largest regional centre outside Adelaide. I acknowledge that the world has clearly moved on, but at that time there was a willingness on the part of this agrarian socialist to use public money in a way to actively facilitate the development of industry. One could say that he was picking winners in the way that the recent Labor government is accused of doing. If we go through some of those winners, it is interesting to see that they have been very worthwhile investments.

The work that was done way back then secured a major industry and, over recent years, that major industry has faced, as has the community of Whyalla, an existential threat. We are part way through that existential threat, and this is where my interest is going to be in the Supply Bill and in the budget when it is handed down. What is the approach going to be to a community like Whyalla when we have a government that talks about lowering taxes, not picking winners and just using a limited number of tools, such as payroll taxes and other approaches, to encourage business development in South Australia? But the question is: what do you do with the challenge of an industry like the steelworks?

I mentioned that when Sir Thomas Playford did the foundational work on securing an integrated steelworks for Whyalla and for this state he did so with the cooperation of the Labor government. Indeed, Ron Loveday, the member for Whyalla at the time, sat on the committee that Playford chaired, and there was a strong bipartisan approach. I acknowledged in my Address in Reply speech that when Whyalla, and the steel industry, was going through its difficulties nobody on the opposition side attempted to play any politics with it.

The federal government was a bit hit and miss at times, but I think we were fortunate to have Arthur Sinodinos—and I wish him well because he has cancer; I wish him a speedy recovery—in the ministry that he was in at that time, because he recognised the importance of securing the future of the steel industry and, indeed, the future of the community of Whyalla. I indicated in my Address in Reply speech that the South Australian people have handed the baton on to the new government, and I would expect the new government to do all in its power to do the right thing by the community of Whyalla, to do the right thing by the structural steel industry in this state and to do the right thing by the state, because it would be a major hit if we were to lose that industry.

We all know that Sanjeev Gupta and GFG Alliance have said a lot. They went through their 100-day planning process in the lead-up to Christmas. Out of that, a lot of other work has come, including a whole range of feasibility studies, but the major investment has not yet started. I suspect that the major investment will need a trigger, and that trigger will be some form of state government intervention. It might well be a form of intervention very similar to what we as a government did in Port Pirie to help secure the future of the smelters.

That was a very similar situation. Had Pirie lost the smelters, the consequences for that community would have been dire. As a state government, we were willing to underwrite the redevelopment at Port Pirie, and that has led to a very positive outcome for that community. When we were in government, we were willing to entertain the probability of underwriting the investment in Whyalla in order to create that transformation in the steel industry.

So I strongly hope, wish and pray that we will all be able to work constructively with the current state government when it comes to the argy-bargy, the negotiations about what needs to be done at Whyalla to secure the future of what were the Arrium operations. I certainly will, as the local member, to secure the future of that great industry that has given so much to this state. If we were to secure that future it will be transformational given what Sanjeev Gupta has talked about. There is reason to have that confidence, looking at his record and what he has done in the UK.

I will move on to some other issues, but I thought I would raise that one first because it is such a big issue. After all, Whyalla is the third largest community in South Australia, after Adelaide and Mount Gambier. It is my belief that if we line up all the ducks, it might well power on into the future and once again become the second largest community.

I want to mention education. Obviously, there are some potential question marks around the funding that has come through the Building Better Schools program and how that is going to be used. We made a $17 million commitment for the upgrade at Fregon, in the APY lands, so that money is on the table ready to be used. I am assured that the school and the education department are actively planning how that money is going to be used.

The sum of $7 million was allocated to the school at Roxby Downs through the Building Better Schools fund. Roxby Downs has a very young population, and it has a great school with great teachers, so I would like to see that money put to good use. I am quite proud of the work that we did as a state government in regional South Australia when it came to supporting the upgrades of schools. Through the Building Better Schools program, we allocated $200 million to regional communities, in proportion to the student population. We built 48 brand-new science and maths labs for 48 regional schools as part of the STEM Works program, and I was happy to get five of those STEM facilities in my electorate.

The big one when it comes to education—and it has been a perennial issue in the community of Whyalla—is the need for a new high school. We have three public high schools in Whyalla. We have two junior schools that feed into a senior high school, and one of those junior schools has fewer than 200 children. All those schools have structural problems. One was built in the 1940s and is an impressive building. It is still in place, though it is probably not fit for purpose these days as it has a whole raft of maintenance issues. In terms of the built environment in that school, it is a bit of a dog's breakfast, with a mix of a 1940s building, a multistorey building that is no longer fit for purpose, and what are essentially a range of transportables. So those facilities are not ideal.

As a government, we committed money to building a new high school next to TAFE and the University of South Australia in order to create an educational precinct. That school will have just over a thousand students. I went to Eyre High in Whyalla, and Eyre High alone—bear in mind that we have three high schools in Whyalla—had about 1,200 kids back in the 1970s and early 1980s.

A new high school in Whyalla will create a lot of opportunities not only because of its co-location with TAFE and the University of South Australia but because the greater critical mass will mean more students, more specialised services, more curriculum choice and more resources for those kids who have particular needs. We need to do this. It is a ridiculous situation in a community the size of Whyalla to have three public high schools.

Then there is the issue of the vacant sites. I have a few ideas about that, but I will share those at a later stage, as I want to talk about another issue. We went to the election with a proposal for a virtual power plant. I was particularly interested in that because I have a longstanding and active interest in ensuring that people on low incomes and in Housing SA properties get the advantage of having solar on their roof. Indeed, I put some costed proposals to the government at the time, after speaking directly with manufacturers to see how we could get the cost down for systems on roofs.

My proposal was to put three kilowatts on the roof of Housing SA properties in South Australia. The way I configured it, it would have been cost neutral over the life of the program. At the time, I said that the system should be battery enabled. My view was that batteries were still too expensive. But I would have to say that the virtual power plant proposal is a better proposal than the one I put to the government. It has a storage element, but the households do not get the full benefit of having a five-kilowatt system with a 13.5 kilowatt-hour battery because there is private sector investment. There will be private sector funding at the later stages, and the private sector will get a benefit from using the conglomerated storage to feed into the grid.

I know that the Liberal Party also went to the election with a battery proposal. However, the battery proposal from the Liberal Party would do absolutely nothing for people in Housing SA properties or people on low incomes who are in the private rental market. I think we have a moral responsibility to do something about that. The Liberal proposal is not a bad proposal. It is about providing the batteries, using some means testing and providing a subsidy for people who already have solar on their roofs. I think that the priority should be for those people who do not have solar on their roofs and are on low incomes and in Housing SA properties. As the government, you are now the landlord and you have a moral responsibility.

The program should be expanded to the private sector, to landlords who might be interested in enhancing their properties with solar and, potentially, batteries. It is people on low incomes who have been hit the hardest by electricity prices. On that subject, I was going to get on to the topic of the 13 remote communities who live out there and who are dependent on the Remote Areas Energy Supplies scheme. I believe that it is time to review that scheme.

Time expired.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (22:24): I rise tonight to speak to the Supply Bill 2018, which is the appropriation of $6,631 million, or just over $6½ billion, so that we can keep the functions of the Public Service operating, keep the functions of government operating and keep everyone paid until the budget is approved. The budget will be announced on 4 September (which personally is a significant date, but I will leave that out). This is standard practice. I heard in the contribution from the member for Lee, and from other members on the other side, the feigned shock and horror at this spending and how there is not a vast list of budget proposals for this money to go to.

Well, how short their memory is of the 16 terrible years they were in government. They cannot even remember how a supply bill works. Even those members who have been here for a couple of terms cannot remember. They know darn well how it works. This has been standard practice for decades and certainly for the16 years under the previous Labor government. Yes, the numbers change. Of course the numbers change because in a non-election year the budget is laid down well before September, but obviously everything has to be put in place when there is a change of government, whether it is the Liberal Party or whether it is the Labor, and we did see a failed third force who thought they might be in government but over-reached by several miles. This is how it works, and I wanted to make those obvious statements.

We listened to the member for Lee and his vigorous contribution of several hours over a couple of days and he talked about transparent land deals. That is exactly what we should have in this place, but what did he and his government preside over when they were running this state? Gillman. What a disgrace that was. That was supposedly going to be some great oil and gas hub that was going to look after the interests of the Cooper Basin. Yes, I did work in the Cooper Basin, as did the Minister for Agriculture (member for Chaffey). Decades ago, I did a couple of years up there.

Yes, it is a noble aspiration to have a hub for oil and gas and to have somewhere to set up operations. They promised 6,000 jobs under this deal, this very shady deal, which fell apart. The only people who were employed in this whole operation were the lawyers who were trying to defend the previous government.

An honourable member: Pretty good jobs.

Mr PEDERICK: Yes, pretty good jobs. So, so much for those 6,000 jobs that were supposedly going to come with the oil and gas industry. It does worry me when people come here trying to validate where they were in previous times.

I want to talk about health for a little while. I was on the Social Development Committee, and we looked into how regional health operated on an excellent reference put by the Minister for Energy and Mining (member for Stuart) in regard to how health advisory committees operated and the like.

The beauty of it is that we are going to change all that anyway, and we are going to put local health boards in. We are going to get health operating from the ground level because certainly from what I found from that committee and what I have heard throughout the community, health advisory councils, for whatever reason, did not know the full reach of the ambit within which they could operate, or they were purposely not told what their reach was.

There was a big claw of government with seven layers of bureaucracy, from the ground floor at the local level impacting right through to the minister. I had a classic example of that one day. A local bloke from Coomandook had lost his shaver in the Flinders Medical Centre. I thought that I would just write to Flinders to see if I could get his shaver back. Well, that was wrong.

I got a letter back from the minister at the time, the former member for Playford, and it said, 'No, you can't do that. That is a terrible thing.' I thought, 'Hell, I was hardly undermining the government by asking for a shaver.' I went through the process, wrote the ministerial and they actually put up the money for a shaver—but what a process—and we were talking about so-called transparency before with issues like Gillman.

I look at health and the lack of funding especially in regional hospitals, where we have a $150 million backlog in maintenance funding that needs to happen, and the litany of Labor's failures especially with the building of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital. Someone who works for me was in there only last week and they spent three days in the emergency bay before they got to a ward. When they got to the ward it was a nice single room, absolutely, but it was for one night. I talked about the food the other day so I do not need to repeat it—but it is disgusting.

I am not having a crack at the staff by any means. When I visited my employee the other night, a team leader caught hold of me because he could see I was trying to find the right way into emergency, because you have to go outside the main building to the car park and back through another door and it is not exactly clearly signed, and that person set me on the right track so they were very good.

The problem we have with the new Royal Adelaide Hospital is that they were obviously planning it as they built it instead of spending the time to plan it appropriately, but because of their political ideals and their political aspirations they decided, 'No, we'll just rush it,' and there were so many flaws—tens of thousands of flaws. We have since found out that there is about a $270 million blowout in health apart from other single line budgets, we have found that since coming into government.

There is a lot of work to do. I am proud of our minister in the other place, the Hon. Stephen Wade. He did an exemplary job in opposition and he is doing an exemplary job as a minister. From what I understand, in the very near future the works on the new emergency department at the Murray Bridge hospital will be under way. That was one of our election commitments, one of our 300 election commitments to this state.

I look at education where there is so much work to be done. Finally, we have got in and over time–and it will take time—we are going to bring year 7 out of primary school and into secondary school and actually catch up with the rest of the nation. For many travelling families—and we run into them even in a little town like my home town of Coomandook—they come from Western Australia, they come from Queensland and they work for local farmers and the like and travel around. They need education, but there is that blip when you are in primary school in one sector and secondary school in the other.

I acknowledge that health and education probably take up about 50 per cent of the state budget, which will be about $19 billion this year, but it is vital that we get those services in play. I certainly understand this because in the conversations I have had in places like Murray Bridge High School (and I know I have another meeting coming up shortly) they are already concerned that they are pretty well at capacity. They are not concerned about the policy as such, they are just concerned about where they are going to fit the students. I have said to them that it is not going to happen immediately. We will work through that process, we will work through it diligently, and we will work through it appropriately so that we get the right things in place, especially the infrastructure that will have to go into place to put year 7 students into secondary school.

We have heard a bit about transport in this place over the last couple of days, as well as rural roads. Whether you are in the electorate of Flinders, Narungga, Mount Gambier, MacKillop or my electorate of Hammond, there are so many roads that have been let go. When the Labor Party was in government, instead of spending money on road funding they just dropped the speed limit. That is a great idea, especially if you are an almost outer suburban member like myself, still doing 60,000 kilometres a year, and then I look at the Deputy Speaker who probably does close to 100,000 and the member for Stuart, the Minister for Energy and Mining, who probably does 100,000 kilometres a year, apart from when he flies.

You have to get somewhere. It is all right to bring up the argument, 'We have to bring the speed down. We'll save so many lives,' and I have listened to the academics. I have seen what they have done between Murray Bridge and Mannum, between Murray Bridge and Langhorne Creek and Wellington. Those roads were slowed down about five years ago due to lack of infrastructure spending, to make sure they could sit at 110 km/h, but, 'Oh no, we'll just slow everything down because that is all the road is rated at now.'

Not long before the state election back in March there were eight specific roads across the state: two were in my electorate (for the last four years they were looked after by the member for Chaffey, the Minister for Agriculture), the Browns Well Highway and the Ngarkat Highway, and the other six roads were across the state. All of a sudden it was, 'No, we won't upgrade them. We'll just downgrade the speed limit.'

It gets more interesting because recently, before the election, and certainly in the case of the Browns Well Highway which has been a B-double route for quite a while, there was a desktop study done and, 'Oh well, we'll put it up for road train status.' I have no problem with that as far as the freight task goes. As far as the freight task goes I do not mind bigger vehicles, 36-metre vehicles taking on a load, but they have to be on roads that can handle it. I just do not agree that you can do a desktop study, with no inspection, and say, 'This is how we do it,' when not that much earlier the government had decreased the speed limit.

What happens when you have the end of a close to 36-metre vehicle? Sometimes they get up a bit of a wave and you do not have many centimetres of bitumen, and the next thing you are in the dirt. It is very dangerous for those big vehicles coming either way but also for smaller cars and four-wheel drives, etc., travelling on the road. I have written to our transport minister, the Hon. Stephan Knoll, to see if we can get shoulder sealing done, especially on the Browns Well Highway, because that is the main road train route now from Pinnaroo around to the Port. As I said, I have no problem with the freight task; it is just that we need to manage it appropriately and spend the money where we need to.

In regard to transport, we have had the great tragedy of what happened at Thomas Foods on 3 January. On this side of the house, we have kept up the commitment to make sure those workers from Murray Bridge can get transport through to Lobethal and back to Murray Bridge, especially the ones who finish at midnight. I commend Darren and Chris Thomas and their team, David McKay, for offering everyone a job bar the 417 visas, the backpackers. Everyone else, the 457s and the permanent workers, had the opportunity to still have work in Murray Bridge—and there are about 90 people working at the plant in the skin section and the rendering section—and about 400 have gone to Lobethal and quite a few have headed over to Tamworth. They have worked hard after a great industrial tragedy, and thankfully it was not a human tragedy.

The issue with getting access to Lobethal has been an interesting one for B-doubles. We have been seeking B-double access into Lobethal for seven years. It is a real tragedy that it took this industrial tragedy—a $300 million-plus fire—to fix a problem that had been mulled over for seven years, and it was fixed in two weeks. We got B-double access into Lobethal. I acknowledge the Adelaide Hills Council and the Adelaide Hills community for embracing what had to happen so that those processing rates of sheep could be kept up.

A lot of the cattle have been shipped off to works the other side of Melbourne to try to keep up some of the Woolworths contracts, etc. But as far as I understand it, the processing of cattle is still down on those numbers, but with that double shift now at Lobethal sheep can be processed. I think it is in the Minister for Education's electorate, and it is a very good thing. I acknowledge that I have not always been friends with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) but they got on board and got the clearances in place so that things could happen and get the building done. I praise all the workers who got the extra building in place so that those double shifts could happen.

In the few minutes I have left I want to talk about electricity supply in this state. It has been outrageous that the outlook of the previous government was all about green energy, and they forgot about the transition bit, which is absolutely serious. We saw the chaos of what happened. We were sitting in this place at 4.16pm on 28 September 2016 when the lights went out from Mount Gambier to Border Village. It was outrageous.

What was even more outrageous, as the member for Flinders, the Deputy Speaker, knows, there were issues with emergency generation in his electorate and there were issues with emergency generation at Flinders Hospital. It is sad that I have heard of similar problems at other hospitals when they have done tests recently. I think it was the new Royal Adelaide Hospital when they did a test of simple procedures like making sure that you can pump diesel through to the motor that is going to power the place.

This was outrageous. Yes, there was a storm event because of the absolute over-reliance on wind energy in this state—53 per cent of our energy is generated by renewables. Renewables are fine but we just have too many of them. For a few million dollars the government could have kept the Northern power station going. My father-in-law, who passed away a few years ago, would be rolling in his grave. He used to work there and he would have been absolutely disgusted at what happened.

It was pleasing to hear the Minister for Energy and Mining, the member for Stuart, talk about the quotes from the former minister for energy, the member for West Torrens, in regard to interconnection. Before we came out with our policy of interconnection to New South Wales and put in the seed funding of $200 million, the Labor Party was on board with the interconnection. They said that it is a great thing. We certainly have about 900 megawatts of interconnection through the Heywood interconnector and the Murraylink interconnector through to Victoria. It does great work. We can suck into coal in Victoria and New South Wales when we need it, and when our wind farms have stopped going and when the silo is not operating, then we can send the power back when they are operating.

The beauty of our interconnection policy will fix that up in the longer term with that mix. What we need is base load energy in the east and the overabundance of renewable energy in this state. It is a great thing to be on the side of the house and, after 12 years of being in opposition, I certainly understood when the Supply Bill came through. We were organised to speak on it. We knew what it was all about. We knew what the funding was for and we knew that the detail would come through in the budget bill. I commend the bill.

Ms STINSON (Badcoe) (22:44): I rise to speak to Supply Bill (No. 1) and, unsurprisingly, I support it. This is only my second address to the house and, silly me, I thought that when a government was asking me to vote for $6.6 billion of taxpayer money that they might explain what they are going to spend it on. I do not really think it is that unreasonable, but clearly it is. That is fine, I am happy to let those opposite know how money has been wisely spent in my community in the time that I have been Labor's candidate and, of course, now the MP for Badcoe. I am happy to provide some constructive ideas of how the government might spend some of that $6.6 billion that they are seeking.

I am very fortunate to be the first ever member for Badcoe. Badcoe covers an area that comprises 15 suburbs: Ashford, Keswick, Forestville, Black Forest (where I live), Everard Park, Clarence Park, Clarence Gardens, Glandore, South Plympton, North Plympton, Kurralta Park, Edwardstown, Ascot Park and parts of Millswood and Plympton. It is a pretty diverse area: diverse incomes, educational backgrounds, professions, ethnicities and ages and, of course, what comes with that is diverse needs.

Within its boundaries fall four separate councils and three federal electorates. While there are many differences between the people who live in this area, after doorknocking and calling a great number of the homes in Badcoe, some common themes shine through. These include improved community infrastructure, especially sporting and recreational, transport solutions to create better traffic flows and safer transport, and top quality public and private education. To that end, as a candidate I set about answering those needs.

The whole reason I left my job as a TV reporter was to put my name forward as Labor's candidate for the seat of Badcoe and to make a difference to my community not just to talk but to listen and deliver. I spoke with thousands of voters at tram and train stops, at schools, at sports games, shopping centres, at their doors and on the phone, all to glean the ideas that would make the most difference to my community. I worked in partnership with others to develop plans and cost projects and then lobby the state government to deliver what my community needed.

Chief among those projects, and among the first projects I delivered during my campaign, was the upgrade of the Goodwood Oval grandstand and clubrooms. Attending a Goody Saints game at the oval one Saturday, I checked out the facilities. What struck me most was not the ageing paint job, the worn carpet or even the musty smell, it was not the cupboard that passed for an office for the growing footy and cricket clubs and it was not even the fact that the bar had no view to the oval, meaning slow food and drink sales even on game days. It was the fact that there were no change rooms for girls and women.

I live just a few streets from Goodwood Oval and I would see girls getting dressed behind skip bins or shielded by car doors, and I remember having to do that myself in younger years when I was playing sport. There was no opportunity for them to have the locker room camaraderie that is so much a part of footy and cricket culture. Yet there are more and more girls signing up to play sport, no doubt spurred on by seeing new heroes emerge on their TV screens—elite female athletes in the women's leagues of both footy and cricket who are every bit as tough as the boys.

So I set to work with my local clubs to devise some plans. Together, we ran petitions and surveys, doorknocked and called Millswood residents and got a good feel for the level of support among the clubs, and also the surrounding community, for upgrading this community infrastructure. We also got a good idea of some of the challenges and worked to address those, too. There had been unfunded plans to simply squeeze women's change rooms into the existing structure, but it was pretty obvious that that was not a long-term or even half decent solution. Any such funding would be a waste, with an ageing grandstand clubhouse which really needed replacing.

I am glad to say that I gained the community's support to lobby for a brand-new combined grandstand and clubhouse. All those petitions and surveys had an effect and the people in my community were heard. People like the member for West Torrens, the member for Mawson and the then premier, Jay Weatherill, realised the value of such an investment. They realised that it is not an investment in bricks and mortar so much as an investment in health, social cohesion and community building.

In this case, it is also an investment in gender inclusion. The fact that the new building will also be disability accessible for the first time means that it is also a win for sports people with a disability, including the C7 football competition, which is also played at the oval. Put simply, investing in sport is a winning strategy. With that understanding and the support of my party, $2.5 million was secured under the Labor government for the new clubhouse.

A personal highlight of my campaign was breaking the wonderful news to the passionate and hardworking Goodwood Roos Cricket Club and the Goodwood Saints Football Club, their members, volunteers and fans, because it was something that they had long wanted but long been told was too lofty a dream. Now it was coming true. I am glad that this funding was committed by the Weatherill government in the current budget. It is an investment that will deliver for many years. Planning is now well underway and I look forward to seeing work begin at the site later this year.

The cherry on top was getting Fund My Neighbourhood funding at the oval just a few months later. The cricket and footy clubs rallied community support and online votes to get a new electronic scoreboard, a barbecue and cricket sight screens. Once again, the local community got behind the clubs and they triumphed, scoring several thousand dollars extra. I would like to acknowledge the work of Craig Scott and Jason Scroop at their respective clubs for putting their faith in me to listen to them and to deliver for our community, and the committee members who are now driving it forward in partnership with the Office for Recreation and Sport and Unley council. I would also like to recognise the efforts of all those club members and local residents who got on board.

This is just one of more than 20 projects secured for Badcoe in the past 15 months. I will take you through a few of them—not all of them, do not worry; just a few of them. We will have plenty of time over the next four years to talk about all of them. The $9 million new sports hub at the Women's Memorial Playing Fields means that for the first time Forestville Hockey Club will be able to train and play on a competition grade synthetic pitch.

Again, I worked with one of our great local sporting clubs to gauge and then demonstrate community support for this investment at St Mary's. Although the hub itself is outside my electorate, it benefits many residents of my community who are members of the Forestville Hockey Club. I was happy to partner with the then member for Elder, Annabel Digance, and the then member for Waite, Martin Hamilton-Smith, who both worked hard over many years to achieve this new facility. I pay tribute to their efforts to get this great result for our communities. The new sports hub at the Women's Memorial Playing Fields also frees up valuable open space at Goodwood Oval for other people in Badcoe to enjoy. The City of Unley is particularly short on public space, so this is a great result.

Another idea that those opposite might like to consider when deciding what to spend that $6.6 billion on is, in partnership with the energetic team at the Millswood Bowling Club, I managed to secure $70,000 for new women's change rooms. Currently, the 1950s-built toilets are right next to the kitchen, and in fact members of the public need to walk through the kitchen to reach the toilets. This is another great investment in women's sport. Both pennants and the growing and very popular social competition known as Night Owls will benefit from it.

A total of $1.2 million was also provided to Weigall Oval for a massive overhaul of those ageing and underutilised facilities, in partnership with the City of West Torrens. That project will be delivered in three phases—so it goes into the next budget year as well—and it includes a reconfigured baseball diamond and soccer pitches, a new clubhouse and a new nature playground, which is currently under construction.

Also, under Labor's highly successful fund for synthetic pitches, which I hope those opposite might continue, Cumberland United soccer will play on a new surface soon at AA Bailey Reserve at Clarence Gardens. That fund was largely driven by the member for West Torrens, and I commend him on that work and the wonderful results it is providing for soccer, one of our most popular grassroots sports.

I am also proud that by listening to local people we managed to deliver $8,000 for the restoration of a World War I 18-pounder gun for the volunteer-run Army Museum of South Australia at Keswick and, my favourite, two new air-conditioning units, for Active Elders and the Lions Club at Ascot Park. Those two projects cost not a lot of money, but they make a lot of difference in my community.

There are many more projects, which I would be happy to detail to members at any time and which I hope to have the opportunity to elaborate on at some point in the future. But there is a lot more to be done, and when members opposite think about what they might do with that $6.6 billion that they are asking for, they may like to consider some of these things. I hope that they do consider them; they would be of great benefit to my community.

Had Labor been elected at the 2018 election, we would have delivered further vital infrastructure improvements to this growing and diverse community in Badcoe. There would have been the removal of three level crossings, at Plympton Park, Goodwood and Westbourne Park; the upgrade of Kesmond Reserve at Keswick; the upgrade of Dumbarton Avenue Reserve at Edwardstown to ensure it can be used by young families with kids as well as dog owners; and $3.5 million for a new school hall for Richmond Primary School, an incredibly popular and well overdue plan.

There would have been a new children's centre at Plympton, one of several new centres—I hope those opposite have a look at that policy, which builds on the successful centres that have already been delivered by Labor—and $25,000 for upgraded women's change rooms for the Southern Suburbs Rugby Union Club at AA Bailey Reserve in Clarence Gardens, which is a pretty small price to pay for girls and women to be able to play a sport they love in safety, security and comfort. May I mention the very long record of achievement by the women's side. They have won several consecutive premierships now.

The people of Badcoe did vote for Labor quite convincingly. Obviously they were voting for a strong local member who will listen to them and stand up for them, but they were also voting for these local commitments, too. Mums and dads were voting for the much-needed new school hall at Richmond Primary. Dog lovers and parents alike were voting for the Dumbarton Avenue Reserve upgrade at Edwardstown. Families, especially those who need a little extra support, were voting for the new children's centre at Plympton, and the Keswick community was voting for an upgrade of Kesmond Reserve, a focal point for local recreation.

As I mentioned, rugby union players and fans, and for that matter supporters of women's sport, were voting for the new change rooms at Clarence Gardens, and pretty much everyone was voting for the level crossings to be removed, especially at Plympton Park but also at Westbourne Park and Goodwood for the safety and faster traffic flow, particularly in peak hours.

Nothing I have said this evening should come as any surprise to those opposite. I have written to the Premier, outlining the concerns of my community that these important improvements, which they voted for, may go by the wayside under this government. However, I am surprised that although I wrote to the Premier over a month ago so far I have not received as much as an acknowledgement letter. I hope that this is not a sign of how the Premier and his government intend to deal with electors in Badcoe. I hope for a response, and a positive one at that, in the near future.

I would also like to see the state government release the next round of Fund My Neighbourhood funding and indeed continue that funding in the next financial year. This was a very popular funding program, and electorates represented by those opposite benefited as well. It has activated communities to build their own argument for funding their own local ideas. It was not about the government telling communities what they should have: it was about communities deciding that for themselves. There were about 30 applications pitched by individuals and community groups across Badcoe, and there were some really great, original ideas.

As I mentioned, under the Fund My Neighbourhood program the cricket and footy clubs based at Goodwood Oval achieved a new electronic scoreboard, barbecue and cricket sight screens. But I was also happy to work with people like Dana Bell, a mum in Clarence Gardens, to rally community support for a new nature play playground at the AA Bailey Recreation Ground at Clarence Gardens, a very popular spot, and I was delighted to support Edwardstown Primary School's bid for a nature playground of their own.

It was a joy to attend their very successful annual strawberry fair. Make sure you go there with an empty belly, because it is full of yummy treats. I went there to see that parents and kids had chalked just about every wall and every path, urging fairgoers to vote for their Fund My Neighbourhood project, and obviously that was successful, because they managed to score the money.

I was also delighted to help secure a new playground and veggie patch for Ascot Park Primary School. Many children in Badcoe attend that primary school. I commend the work of that school community to improve their facilities. The veggie patch will feature fruits and vegetables and herbs in cuisines from all over the world, reflecting the very diverse ethnic backgrounds of the children at that school. It will also be disability-accessible, which is wonderful for kids and adults of all mobilities. I would also like to draw members' attention to the investments in education, investing in the education of Badcoe students under Labor's $690 million Building Better Schools fund.

An honourable member interjecting:

Ms STINSON: Hear, hear! Five million dollars is being spent as we speak at Black Forest Primary School. The designs for those improvements have been completed and are very impressive. The plans propose upgrades to existing buildings to create facilities and to accommodate growth and establish a science and technology learning area. The Keertaweeta Building is also planned to be extended to provide new learning areas, and a refurbishment of the administration and reception areas is planned along with the removal of existing sheds and transportable buildings which, unfortunately, contain asbestos.

Three million dollars was secured for new buildings at Plympton International College. Planning is underway at that college as the first stage of their Building Better Schools upgrade and, again, the designs are quite impressive. The plans propose to improve the linkages between learning areas, and upgrade art and drama and general learning spaces, the resource centre and also to provide a year 12 study area. The changes will better meet the needs of students, with a focus on flexible learning, especially using digital learning resources. Other areas for proposed redevelopment include the gym.

Further plans to upgrade outdoor learning areas are underway as well, and it is also proposed to relocate the student lockers, install window shading and remove, once again, asbestos from that school. Pasadena High has received $10 million. Their plans propose to refurbish selected core buildings, including the performing arts centre, the special education unit and all courtyards. It is proposed that the new sports, science, technology, engineering and maths centre is constructed and linked to the existing gym. New and enhanced sensory outdoor learning spaces specific to students with special needs are also planned, along with a new entry canopy to enhance the public presentation of the school.

Although Plympton International and Pasadena High fall just outside Badcoe's boundaries, hundreds of Badcoe children attend those schools, and I have a strong interest in ensuring they are well funded and equipped with the infrastructure needed for a high standard of schooling. There has been speculation that this government will pare back or divert the Building Better Schools funding, but for the sake of my constituents I hope that does not happen.

Badcoe schools have also been improved, or are currently being improved, thanks to the STEM Works program. Plympton Primary School, Richmond Primary School and Forbes Primary School have each received $1 million for new STEM classrooms. I was happy to visit each of these schools with the then minister for education, Susan Close, and check out the work that is underway. I would of course invite our current Minister for Education to come and visit those schools and see what they are doing. There is some very innovative work at those schools.

Science, technology, engineering and maths, or STEM, is a sector where we know there will be future jobs. We want our young people to have the skills and the passion for those professions and trades; that is, both for their own career satisfaction and also, of course, for our state's economy. Sadly, there is an underrepresentation of women in STEM. The provision of these specialist classrooms to all children, as well as many other Labor initiatives to open doors for girls in STEM—which I hope those opposite will continue—will make a difference to levelling the playing field in future.

I hope that those opposite will reflect on some of these great investments in the Badcoe community and the proposals that we have put forward that still require funding. I hope that you will support them. They are good ideas and they are things that are really popular in my community. I hope that has given you a bit of inspiration as to how you might spend the $6.6 billion that you are asking for in the Supply Bill. As I mentioned earlier, I support the bill.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition.

Mr MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Leader of the Opposition) (23:04): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to address the house on the issue of supply. As has already been indicated, the opposition supports the Supply Bill for a whole range of practical reasons. However, I think it provides an important opportunity for members of the opposition to be able to articulate the substantial and serious concerns that we have in regard to the conduct of this government, but, more importantly, the agenda they seem to be pursuing in some areas and the complete lack of agenda in others.

In fact, I do not think it is too great a stretch to draw the house's attention to the fact that this bill and the actions of this government thus far and their agenda, or lack thereof, speak to a bit of a crisis that is emerging within the conservative side of politics throughout the Western world. I think it is fair to say that we have seen a changing environment occur rapidly over recent years in a way that is seeing a fundamental shift in people's perception of what makes an economy work, not for an economy's sake but in the interests of the people that exist within it.

With regard to the Supply Bill, one would ordinarily hope that there would be a far greater degree of detail when it comes to the expenditure of in excess of $6 billion, but in this instance it is sadly lacking, which leads one to speculate. I want to start with arguably the most important area of public expenditure and that is, of course, the area of health. We know all too well that health expenditure now equates to upwards of 30 per cent of the entirety of the state budget, a figure that is growing. That figure is growing for a whole range of reasonable reasons, not least of which is an ageing population.

When it comes to health policy from this government, I think it can be characterised in the following way. Health policy, on behalf of this new government, is either an act of compliance or an act of imitation. There does not seem to be too much else in there. I heard, with great interest earlier this evening, the member for Newland talking about the new government's policy with respect to Modbury Hospital. Not surprisingly, it is the case that the Modbury Hospital policy of the new government is in fact exactly the same as the former government's health policy in regard to capital upgrades. The member for Newland was right to point out that there is a planned dramatic investment in palliative care services in that area.

Why did the former government commit itself to that endeavour? Because it was an area of need that deserved additional improvement—likewise with other areas of investment that have been at Modbury Hospital in a way that is consistent with that community's interests. The only point of difference that exists in the case of Modbury Hospital is on the question of the high dependency units, something I am sure will be explored in far greater detail as clinicians start to increasingly express their views around that proposition.

There is the $270 million commitment that the former government made regarding The QEH. Another example is the investment that was being made in Country Health. Added up, all of these investments talk to a massive overhaul of our public infrastructure within our public health system in a way that was entirely consistent with clinical advice and in the interests of the South Australian community.

What is lacking from the government at the moment, though, is a coherent policy in a whole range of other areas that South Australians are rightly concerned about. If I were to pick one example, it would be in the issue of meningococcal B. The former government took a policy to the last election to make meningococcal B vaccinations free for all South Australian families with children under the age of two. Children under the age of two were going to get access to free meningococcal B vaccinations.

This government has treated this question rather flippantly thus far. They have imitated us on some areas, but not on this one, and it begs the question why. It begs the question of what their priorities are, when it comes to not just health policy but a whole range of other health policies within the community. There is a growing body of evidence that speaks to this now becoming a substantial and important desire within the South Australian community.

It is not true to say that no South Australian families can get access to the meningococcal B vaccination. That is not true. In fact, a great number can, but only those who can afford it. It can cost a South Australian family somewhere in the order of $500 per child to vaccinate them against meningococcal B and, of course, what we know on this side of the chamber is that that cost can be prohibitive for a lot of low and middle income South Australian families, which means that their kids do not get vaccinated against meningococcal B while others do.

We believe on this side of the chamber that one's income should not be the sole variable that determines whether or not your kid is going to be vulnerable to contracting meningococcal B, which we know has a disproportionately larger representation of incidents occurring in South Australia than in any other state within the country. This is something that is worth pursuing, and what have we heard from this government thus far? What has their action been? A committee, a committee about a policy that has already been fully costed and that is ready to be delivered. This government seems determined to take no action, maybe because, of course, they do not want to imitate the former government too much.

Then, of course, there is education policy. Education policy is probably one of the issues closest to the hearts of all members on this side of the house, myself included, because education is ultimately the most powerful lever we have to tackle growing income inequality within our community. There are other areas of policy that can be powerful in this regard—taxation policy, for instance, and I will come to that in a moment. But education is fundamental, and we know that education infrastructure in our communities, particularly in public schools, can have a material impact on educational outcomes.

We know that, which is why the former government had a substantial policy to commit over $600 million worth of funds towards upgrading infrastructure in our public school system. We are concerned that some of that expenditure will end up being compromised going to the areas of the greatest need because of this government's policy around the moving of year 7. The movement of year 7 and the adjustments that are being proposed by the government in this regard are being talked about as being a priority to bring us in line with other mainland states, but that is not a body of evidence within and of itself.

What we want to see as an opposition, and certainly what we pursued in government, is delivering on education policies that we know make a material difference in terms of educational outcomes. A proposition that will see infrastructure being utilised in a way that achieves a political end, rather than actually achieving something that is demonstrated by evidence as being the most worthwhile investment, is a question worthy of pursuit.

Furthermore, we stand proud of our record, particularly around investment in STEM resources in our public school system. Programs are getting rolled out throughout the community as we speak, and I am sure that the new education minister will be gleefully cutting the ribbons on all the projects that Labor invested in over the years that are being rolled out.

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leader, excuse me. The Leader will be heard in silence, thank you.

Mr MALINAUSKAS: That takes me to another program because we were not just investing in infrastructure in public schools. We were also investing in infrastructure out in the community generally. Infrastructure is a fundamentally important policy of a government that is serious about not taking its hands off the wheel. This goes to the crisis that is emerging within the conservative side of politics around the appropriate actions for a government to take when it comes to economic policy.

We on this side of the house take a more modern view than the neoclassical or far right agenda, that governments actually do have a legitimate role to play within an economy, particularly an economy that wants to prioritise job growth, which has clearly been a need in this state on the back of the destructive efforts on behalf of a conservative federal government driving industry out of this town.

We took the view that it is appropriate in those circumstances to invest in the economy and government playing a role—a more traditional Keynesian approach, which we now know amongst economists is coming back into fashion at a cracking pace. We demonstrated how serious we were about infrastructure with extraordinary investments, productive investments in infrastructure that did not just provide jobs just during the course of construction but, more importantly, continued to provide jobs throughout our economy.

To give an example, I want to talk about the iconic Adelaide Oval investment. Adelaide Oval was a classic example of a piece of economic infrastructure investment which provided jobs at the time but which is continuing to provide jobs today long after that construction was completed. The most gleeful part of the Adelaide Oval example is that we know how passionately and viciously that infrastructure investment was opposed by the now government or by the conservative side of politics.

Likewise, the new Royal Adelaide Hospital was fundamentally opposed by the conservative side of politics and, despite some teething issues with that hospital, which will be ironed out in due course due to the hard work of the men and women who work within that great institution and facility, we will have a fantastic piece of capital infrastructure within the health system that will continue to see a growing number of productive jobs, particularly around research in and around that hospital.

There are a whole range of other examples of great investments in infrastructure made by the former government: duplication of the Southern Expressway; what we have already seen take place around South Road, Darlington; and Torrens to Torrens. Of course, these are the greatest examples, but there were even others before that with the Anzac Highway underpass.

Infrastructure remains an incredibly important piece of public policy. We will be an opposition that goes about holding this government to account very closely on what it is doing on infrastructure. There are a lot of people within the industry who are already raising concerns with this opposition, raising concerns with me as the Leader of the Opposition, about the lack of a coherent policy and a pipeline of work on behalf of this new government.

I want to raise one area where I am willing to applaud the new government in the event that they are able to deliver on what the new minister has committed himself to, that is, the Pym to Regency component of the South Road north-south corridor expressway. This was an investment that our former government put to Infrastructure Australia. A business case was submitted and the funds were lined up. It was work that was largely designed by the former government, but the new government has indicated that it will deliver on that. They have set a strict time line for themselves to do that on which we will hold them to account, but this is an important investment.

I want to raise Pym to Regency because it is in the electorate that is the most important in the state—that is, the seat of Croydon. I put on the record my desire for the new infrastructure minister to get back to my office with regard to a meeting request that was put in some time ago to address the issue of the Croydon Kings soccer club, otherwise known as Polonia—I suspect the new member for Waite will take an interest in this particular club as well—to make sure that their concerns around what will happen to their parcel of land are addressed during the course of that redevelopment.

Industry policy, though, relates to infrastructure policy, and this new government has made clear what is their industry policy: do nothing. I am concerned that that is resulting in jobs and opportunities being missed out by this state, Google being a good example of this. This new government seems to think that writing a letter to Google will somehow attract them here. We believe that it takes more than that. One does not want to be sitting on their hands and not acting aggressively when it comes to an opportunity like this, yet this government seems hellbent on an industry policy that is a hands off the wheel approach, something that we do not believe in and something that we think should be contested. I dare say there are a number of other business opportunities that we are missing out on in this context.

Taxation policy is something that all Labor people care about very deeply, particularly in the context of rising income inequality within our community, which is an economic scourge that many western economies are dealing with. Taxation policy ultimately, though, is about getting a balance. We on this side of the house place a higher value on minimising the tax burden for those people who have the least capacity to pay. Capacity to pay should always be a variable when it comes to decision-makers' thought processes around how taxation policy should apply.

That is something that has contributed to the opposition's willingness to commit itself to the payroll tax reductions that have been proposed by the government. We have offered them a bipartisan approach in reducing that, because we have already demonstrated our credentials when it comes to reducing payroll tax—something that the former government did with a great degree of endeavour and delivered real results for small businesses in this state. If there is a capacity under the new budget to provide for further accommodation of small businesses, that is something that we support.

Something that has been consistently raised by the government thus far, though, in regard to tax policy is a reference to the emergency services levy. I note that the member for Giles was bang on in pointing out the fact that adjustments to the emergency services levy did not occur in a vacuum. They occurred because of a draconian act by a federal government not honouring their promises and instead deciding to cut health and education in a way that was incredibly substantial. I cannot tell you how proud I was only a few nights ago to hear the federal Leader of the Opposition committing himself to going a long way to restoring some of the funds to health and education that were cut by the Hockey-Abbott government's 2014 state budget. This is a good thing to do.

It will be very interesting to see how this new government acts in regard to that proposition. What will the new Premier and the new Treasurer do when they are faced with the opportunity of having a Labor government elected at federal level that will hand this state government more money in order to be able to deliver important health and education services? Will they support the federal Labor Party in their policy proposition to restore that funding, or will they back in Prime Minister Turnbull and his $65 billion worth of cuts to their mates in the banking sector and the top end of town?

We on this side of the house think the choice is clear at the next federal election, which is an important one not just because of federal policy in this regard but because of the policy decisions that will be made by this new government. Are they going to be a government that sides with giving tax cuts to the big banks after everything they have demonstrated they are able to do? Or are they going to side with a federal party of government that is willing to restore some of the funding cuts that resulted in the ESL adjustments in the first place? That is a question that we as an opposition are very much looking forward to putting to the people of South Australia.

I note the limited time I have left, so I will address one last issue in regard to policy questions that are before us. It relates to the area of SafeWork and their area of jurisdiction and how money has already been expended by this new government in policing small businesses in a way that is adding to their red tape burden. It goes to the question of shop trading hours. We are going to be talking about shop trading hours a lot over coming months.

I note with great interest that the new government, despite all their fanfare, despite all the 16 years of preparation they have had around this issue, still have not brought into the parliament the new legislation regarding shop trading hours. That begs the question: why not? Where is the legislation? Where is the bill? What are they waiting for? They have been talking about it for 16 years. They think everybody is on their side, yet we have not seen the bill.

That in itself adds a degree of intrigue. It is not as much intrigue as that around 'notegate' and 'doughnutgate' and all the other 'gates' that are being applied to all but one minister. Nevertheless, there is a degree of intrigue. I look forward to this government honouring their commitment and bringing this bill into the parliament, because it is going to provide one hell of a contest around who stands for what when it comes to small or large businesses in this state.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.A.W. Gardner.

At 23:25 the house adjourned until Thursday 17 May 2018 at 11:00.