Bills

Supply Bill 2018

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 16 May 2018).

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (11:06): I would like to take a few moments to address the Supply Bill. I open my contribution with a few observations and introductory remarks. First of all, I put on the record the previous government's philosophy regarding how we saw the government interacting with both business and the not-for-profit sector. It was clearly the policy of the previous government and the previous premier that to advance our state the government would have to work closely with the not-for-profit sector and also the business sector.

I note in the Governor's speech in opening parliament he also indicates that it is a priority for his current government, simply and clearly stated, that there be greater co-operation between the public, private and non-government sectors for the overall good of the state. He also says that his government's view is that the new value proposition is to partner with industry, business and communities to deliver the services they most need efficiently and innovatively.

That has presented something new, but that was certainly the policy and the practice of the previous government. It is interesting to note that in the contributions to date on the Supply Bill two out of those three parts—even though it was mentioned in the Governor's speech—have not been touched upon very much at all by those opposite. It is interesting that basically their approach to government is to say, 'The government's role is hands off and let the free market do its bit.'

Mr Duluk: Hear, hear!

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The member for Waite says, 'Hear, hear! which is interesting because according to the Governor the policy of the current government is not that, yet the member for Waite now quite clearly holds a view different from his own leader.

It is interesting that the government also wants to establish Infrastructure SA to vet or assess infrastructure projects. It is interesting that when in opposition, the Premier, the then leader of the opposition, told this chamber on a number of occasions that for the government to get involved in infrastructure spending, infrastructure build, was actually a false economy. He used those words, 'false economy'. So it is interesting that the government has now seen how important it is to have infrastructure projects—

The Hon. V.A. Chapman: It's been our policy for six years.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: It has not been, because—

The Hon. V.A. Chapman: Two elections.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Not at all. Why would your leader call it a false economy if that is your policy? The other observation I make is that in speaking to this $6.6 billion bill—which, as I indicated, is literally a blank cheque for the government to spend until the budget is brought down—a number of members have used quite a bit of their time attacking the previous government's record. It is interesting they have done that because to spend time attacking the previous government but not talk about their own program indicates a lack of confidence about their own program. I would have thought you would use up all your time to talk about what you are going to do in the next four years but, instead, members opposite have used quite a bit of their time to talk about what the previous government did or did not do well.

I would also like to talk about some of the things that happened with previous budgets and previous supply bills in this place, and perhaps some of the things that are in train. That is certainly not the electrification of the Gawler line beyond Salisbury at this stage because, despite the rhetoric, the federal government appears to be quoting the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport as on the hook for the second stage of that project. It is not hook, line and sinker yet because it is way beyond the forward estimates.

It is very important to get a commitment in the budget papers from both this government and the federal government to make sure that stage happens. If Labor wins federally it will happen because the Labor Party has made it very clear, at the federal level, that they have committed to partnering with the state government to deliver on the project and would deliver that project in the near term.

The other thing we did as a government was introduce additional funding for non-government schools, and non-government schools in my electorate were certainly beneficiaries of that. I am hoping that both this state government as well as the federal government will also pursue that additional funding for those schools in my electorate.

One of the major upgrades to schools—and schools are an important part of my community, the education of young people—is the upgrade of the Evanston Gardens Primary School. It took some time but the $6 million project, which is just about complete or which has just been completed, will provide a new administration facility, a new library resource, classrooms and support facilities to cater for future growth of up to 480 students. The school is close to a new housing development, Orleana Waters, and it needed a major upgrade. It is good to see that after some years the school has the facilities to match the great teaching and parent and student body at the school.

Something that is also in the pipeline—I am seeking clarification from the minister on where these projects are at, infrastructure being one of the things that are very important to my community—is the upgrade of Dalkeith Road with the installation of traffic lights. This project had been championed by the Dalkeith CFS. It is an intersection they use constantly to get to various locations around the electorate to fight fires or attend a car crashes or whatever they are required to do. They worked tirelessly for about 2½ years to keep this project on the agenda and I was pleased to see it delivered by the previous minister for road safety, now our leader. Unfortunately, work has not started on that project but I am hoping the current minister will deliver on it because it is important to the community.

Something that is also important to the community is the upgrade of the intersection of Tulloch Road and Main North Road, again a project committed to by the previous government. Over recent days I have been asked where that project is at, and I am seeking clarification on that from the minister. I hope it is one of the projects this government will honour funding for because it is another very important project not only for road safety but also to ensure that the shopping centre in that locality does well, as is difficult to get out of that area. I am hoping that the Supply Bill will ensure these programs are started before 30 June.

The other thing that is very important in terms of transport infrastructure is the Gawler East Link Road to which the previous government committed $55 million. I am hoping the work will start on that shortly and that the money will be used from the Supply Bill to make sure it also starts on time. It is an important project. There have been some differences of opinion between the new government and the previous government regarding the extent of that road. It is interesting that prior to the election the Minister for Transport was a very strong supporter of having that road extended to Tiver Road, and after the election he could not drive the other way quickly enough to get away from that commitment, which is sad news.

Unfortunately, that project has been delayed because of the inordinate amount of time the Town of Gawler took to form its position. The Town of Gawler has not covered itself in glory on this issue. The Town of Gawler took about two years to arrive at a position. In the end, they accepted the transport department's view about the alignment of the road, but in the meantime they spent hundreds of thousands of dollars getting reports done, which delayed the project for two years. That project could have been finished and delivered by now had it not been for the Town of Gawler.

The other issue I need to mention is that the current government wishes to extend the Gawler East Link Road to Tiver Road, which I support, and hopefully that will get done. What I do not support is the proposed alignment. It would be a great thing if this government could get the Gawler council to engage with the community and find an alignment that is acceptable to both the people who want to build the project and the residents who live there.

The previous government also announced a virtual power plant to help with cost pressures and also power prices for the most vulnerable in our community, those people living under Housing SA. That proposal was going to cost the government, and the taxpayer, very little. But importantly, was also aiming to target those people most in need of reducing their power bill. I am hoping that this government will honour that commitment. I think it is a worthy project. It would also give the battery storage industry in this state, and in fact in this country, a boost—I might even say a bit of a surge—and that would help with employment in the northern suburbs.

The other thing which the previous government did, which I am hoping this government will also honour and fund through the Supply Bill, is the government's commitment to invest $7.6 million over five years funding the Gig City. The Gig City project basically identifies precincts to enable greater capacity for the internet. It is designed to enable micro and small businesses in those localities to take advantage of the internet and also the digital economy. I know that the Town of Gawler was one of the beneficiaries of this access to the Gig City in the same way the Stretton Centre was, and I am hoping that the government will honour that commitment. I think it is very important to deliver because it would help small and micro businesses in the area to market their products in the digital age.

One of the great success stories, I felt, of the previous government—and according to the feedback I got from small business in my area—was the Jobs Accelerator Grant Scheme where people engaged additional staff and were provided with a subsidy on the understanding that they were employed over a certain period of time. I know that a lot of businesses engaged additional staff under that scheme, and that grant helped to get them across the line to put on that staff. That program actually did create real jobs because the grant was not available unless new jobs were created. It certainly helped small business in my community, ranging from hotels to real estate businesses, etc. They were able to put on additional staff under that grant scheme, and that was very beneficial for people in my area.

One of the other things we did as a government that I thought was very good in terms of our infrastructure spend was that we made sure that a proportion of those jobs were taken up by local people and also that contracts were given to local contractors. That made sure that South Australian taxpayers' money was used to actually invest in this state, and I am hoping that the new government will also maintain this policy.

One of the biggest beneficiaries of grants in my area was Gawler and District College, which was my school when I was much younger. It is one of two R-12 public schools in my district and, from memory, it opened in the early sixties, in around 1962 or 1964. It has had a major upgrade in terms of STEM facilities, an additional $10 million investment to facilitate grades, and it has also had additional funding to extend the disability program. Some of those facilities are already in place.

I just hope that the change in government has not put the $10 million investment for the facility upgrade at risk. As I understand, from what I am hearing from both my colleague the deputy leader and other schools, even though the money will still go to the schools it may be redirected to implement the government's policy in terms of R-7. This school will probably not be affected because it is an R-12 school, but I would be concerned if other high schools and primary schools had to give up their money to implement the government policy, even though we have received a commitment from the Minister for Education that those agreements would be honoured.

Another infrastructure matter is Curtis Road, which my colleague and neighbour the member for Taylor has raised on occasions prior to the election. I have certainly campaigned strongly for both the local council, the City of Playford, and the previous state government to work together to resolve this issue. I am aware that it was seen by the local Liberal candidate as a key issue. She campaigned on it very strongly and made a number of suggestions and promises about what should be done, so I am very much looking forward to those promises being delivered by the current government. The Premier did say that his government would actually honour each promise and commitment they have made, and I assume that extends to the promises the candidates made on their behalf as well. I look forward to that issue being addressed.

One very simple way of alleviating traffic on Curtis Road is to put a road in between Peachey Road and Stebonheath Road, which would actually help funnel traffic from the new Munno Para West development through to the new school in that locality. I will be reminding the minister of the commitment his candidate made and look forward to that new road being built; perhaps it will not be in this Supply Bill, but certainly in the budget later this year.

I know that this government has a slightly different approach, and it has made it very clear that it will not be providing certain funding, and I quote from the Governor's speech:

My Government's approach very deliberately refocusses support for industry away from short-term stimulus and heavy reliance on individual company grants and subsidies.

That is an interesting comment because one of my biggest critics at election time was a small business person who worked on the Liberal Party campaign for Light. His biggest gripe was that he missed out on government grants because he did not qualify or meet the requirements. Given that this government is not going to have any grants at all to small business, I am not sure how he may see that now, given that he has actually helped elect a government which is contrary to what he wanted to achieve, but that is a story for another day.

There are a couple of things that I think we did very well in terms of grants. A program which the previous government ran, and which was very successful in supporting and growing small business, was the Northern Economic Growth program, a program funded by the state government through State Development in conjunction with the City of Playford through the Stretton Centre. This was a program in partnership with Business SA and also the Gawler Business Development Group.

That is one of the success stories, I think, of the previous government. It enabled its taxpayer funds to be used by both the non-government sector and the business sector to deliver good outcomes. In this case, one small business that took part in this program has employed 11 additional people. The whole program was just over $100,000, involving a number of small businesses, and it has had a really good response.

One of the things which I would support, and which the Governor mentioned in his speech—and I assume that the Minister for Education will follow this up—is increasing in the curriculum entrepreneur-type skills and entrepreneur programs. I was pleased to see that because I was successful in convincing the previous government, in conjunction again with the Stretton Centre, to fund a program, which was funded by the premier's department, State Development, DCSI and also the education department, identifying senior young people in the local schools who have a flair for innovation and entrepreneurship and giving them the skills to develop their ideas, whether business ideas or social enterprise, to fruition. That program has started. I met with these young people a weekend ago and I was quite impressed by their enthusiasm and some of the talent. With those few comments, I would support the Supply Bill.