Appropriation Bill 2018

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (19:39): It is a pleasure to rise on behalf the people of Morphett to speak to this Appropriation Bill, which is the first budget for this newly formed government. On 17 March this year, the people of South Australia overwhelmingly voted for a new government to implement a well-articulated reform agenda based on lower costs, more jobs and better services for all South Australians, whether they are based in Adelaide or throughout the regions in South Australia.

Like all my colleagues on this side of the house, I connected at a grassroots level with our local communities and listened to them. Out of this came the bigger policy reform that will put this state on a better footing. Additionally, we heard at a local level where the state government could assist, and from this came our plan for lower costs, more jobs and better services that incorporate a range of statewide and local commitments.

The 2018-19 budget is a strong budget that not only puts in place this plan for the 2018-19 budget year but also works towards the next four years of this government, which will secure South Australia's future. It is the first Liberal budget for 16 years and comes with new priorities. On coming to government, the incoming Treasurer was presented with reports from Treasury about the real state of the former government's budget situation. In the early days of this government, the Treasurer received the monthly financial reporting prepared by Treasury for January of 2018, which included this summary:

Projected total deterioration in the net operating budget of $193.7 million means that the budget is clearly in deficit in 2017-18.

Compare this to the Mid-Year Budget Review in December 2017, which claimed a $12 million surplus for the 2017-18 year on the part of the former government. We have previously heard in this chamber the member for Lee saying that the Liberals manufactured a deficit in 2017-18. This could not be further from the truth. As the January report outlined, this was a paper surplus propped up by budgeted savings targets or efficiency dividends which in addition included a dividend from the privatisation of the Motor Accident Commission.

We have heard the cry from the other side of those opposite about privatisation, which is the height of hypocrisy. The MAC dividends are estimated at $1.7 billion over eight years from 2014-15, and in 2017-18 the MAC dividends were approximately $340 million. Once these eight years are over, it dries up. Taking out the arguments about claiming a surplus by cashing in an asset via the privatisation of the MAC, what the report from Treasury clearly identifies is that the budget savings and efficiency dividends that were to be relied upon to create a surplus on paper were not going to eventuate.

In 2017-18, these savings were budgeted in the Mid-Year Budget Review to be $248 million, increasing to $715 million by 2021-22, despite the fact that over the preceding years the former government failed to deliver on budget savings targets but, rather, oversaw budget blowouts. In health, for example, which made up a large percentage of this $248 million of savings, during 2017-18 SA Health was given $267 million in total to compensate for budget blowouts or overspending.

The proposed future surpluses of the former Labor government were also highly unlikely ever to have been achieved. After 16 years of financial mismanagement, we are cleaning up Labor's mess and returning the budget to a sustainable position. The 2018-19 budget not only achieves a return to surplus this year but also projects surpluses across the years of the forward estimates.

We heard the Treasurer outline how some governments in the past have used the discovery of a financial mess as an excuse not to keep their election promises. During the lead-up to the election, when I was out doorknocking or at listening posts or shopping centres, I often heard the feedback, 'If the Liberals get into government and find the mess you've been left, you won't keep your promises.' Unfortunately, that is what the South Australian public has been conditioned to. After 16 years of the former government, the state has been left with a financial mess and broken promises. This government will accept the responsibility of cleaning up.

Importantly, the state budget keeps the government's election promises. At the same time, I hear those opposite asking, 'What is the vision of this budget?' This budget is about restoring faith with the people of South Australia—that the commitments we made to them prior to the election will be fulfilled. This budget is also about securing South Australia's future. The budget is a fair and responsible budget that delivers the reform South Australia needs and lays a strong foundation for the future. It delivers on the government's commitment to create more jobs, lower costs and better services. The budget contains $738 million over four years to create jobs and grow the economy.

In the lead-up to the election, the vision of the people of South Australia was to reverse the exodus of young people leaving our state to get work. This budget sets out to turn this around. One area in which the Marshall government is investing is to drive defence jobs, capitalising on the federal government's $90 billion investment in naval shipbuilding based here in South Australia. This focus on growing job opportunities in the defence sector will have a lasting effect for decades to come.

The 2018-19 state budget will also deliver on election commitments to establish a defence export program and veterans' employment initiative. At the same time, we are also investing $1.5 million over the next four years to support defence industry opportunities for South Australian businesses, helping to create more local jobs. This includes the establishment of a defence industries scholarships fund in partnership with universities and industry. The government is investing to build the skilled workforce that will result in thousands of jobs into the future as we take full advantage of the naval shipbuilding contracts.

In addition to these measures, the new state government is partnering with the federal government to deliver skills funding of $202.6 million to help create 20,800 new apprenticeships and traineeships in South Australia over the next four years. This highlights how the Marshall government is investing now to build the skilled workforce that will result in thousands of jobs into the future. The funding of these 20,800 new apprenticeships and traineeships is one aspect of the budget that provides new initiatives, totalling $235.9 million over the forward estimates for the industry and skills portfolio.

Other areas include establishing an international school of culinary excellence, hospitality and tourism on Lot Fourteen at the former Royal Adelaide Hospital site. The government has also established a research commercialisation and start-up fund, which includes support for the new Office of the Chief Entrepreneur. It is critical that as a government we do everything we possibly can to boost our state's export performance, to grow our economy and create more jobs.

In 2002, South Australia's share of national merchandise exports was 7.4 per cent. However, after 16 years the state's export performance has fallen behind the rest of Australia, with our current share at 4 per cent. Previously, I spoke of our plans to lift defence exports. Other ways we can assist in growing exports is by investing significantly in new trade offices in key regions in North America, Asia and the Middle East to support our exporters in accessing these markets. We are helping South Australian exporters to grow by investing $12.7 million over four years for five new trade offices in the US, Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Dubai and Shanghai. Growing our trade with China will remain a focus to further grow export opportunities, particularly in food and wine.

One of the key planks of building a skilled workforce for the future is recognising the investment required in our children and young people as a key driver for South Australia's future prosperity. More than $1 billion is being invested into capital projects, including two brand-new birth to year 12 schools for the metropolitan area. The current annual funding for schools will also increase by $515 million, from 2017-18 to 2021-22, under the Marshall government. This is the biggest investment in schools by any state government in the state's history.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: That wasn't you: it was us.

Mr PATTERSON: The $515 million was put in by the Treasurer. Measures include $20.9 million over four years to support the government's Literacy Guarantee package of measures, which includes 13 new literacy coaches, phonics screen checks for all year 1 students, and literacy and numeracy professional learning programs for teachers. The Literacy Guarantee gives all students the best possible foundation on which to build their educational success.

An amount of $7.5 million is also provided to assist planning to transition year 7 students into secondary school by 2022. These year 7 students will soon benefit from specialist teaching in a high school setting as designated in the national curriculum, ensuring our students are not behind other states. We are also commencing the designation of four entrepreneurial schools, in addition to supporting four schools that wish to offer the International Baccalaureate Diploma.

Tourism is a key contributor to not only the South Australian economy but the local economy of Morphett. We are committed to growing event tourism in South Australia by investing an extra $21.5 million over four years to the event bid fund to secure more lucrative major events and conventions to increase visitation, create employment and drive economic growth. Attracting international and interstate visitors, teams and associated spectators and convention audiences to South Australia keeps our restaurants and shops busy, increases occupancy in hotels and provides business for tourism operators across the entire state, including the regions.

One feature that attracts visitors to Morphett is the coastline along Glenelg, Glenelg South and Somerton Park. Over the next three years, $5.2 million will be dedicated to protecting our pristine coastline and beaches by investing in sand replenishment on metropolitan beaches and research associated with sand retention. These beaches are constantly battling the northward littoral drift of sand up the Adelaide coastline.

Seagrass is an important element in inhibiting this sand drift below the water, and seagrass meadow restoration will be a focus, as well as stormwater harnessing schemes that prevent nutrient-rich stormwater from entering the gulf, which also impacts on seagrass. Because of this coastline, Glenelg is a destination for tourists visiting Adelaide, with approximately 80 per cent of visitors who come to Adelaide taking a trip down to Glenelg. This has led to over 1.3 million visitations per year into the precinct.

Residents and tourists alike want to feel safe and enjoy our vibrant community. A premier seaside destination like Glenelg needs a strong police presence, and that includes a physical police shopfront that is open for more than just business hours during the peak holiday season, so I am pleased that this budget dedicates $12.9 million to implement a new staffing model in all metropolitan police stations, enabling more sworn police to be available for patrols and to enable police stations at Henley Beach, Norwood and Glenelg to open when the community needs them.

Sworn officers will still be maintained at these police stations. It was a key election commitment that I fought for on behalf of my local community and emphasises that this budget again fulfils the commitments the government made to South Australians at the election. It would also enable sworn police officers to be redirected to a new rapid response capability to prevent and respond to terrorism-related incidents, domestic high-risk taskings and to safely manage major events in South Australia, including in Morphett.

The Marshall Liberal government is also building a strong pipeline of productive infrastructure projects that will help grow our economy and create more local jobs. The 2018-19 state budget establishes an $11.3 billion pipeline of projects over the period of 2018-19 to 2021-22 and delivers a record level of general government infrastructure spending in 2018-19.

By working collaboratively with the federal government, we have been able to secure $1.8 billion of new infrastructure funding. Amongst these key projects are the Pym to Regency section of the north-south corridor along South Road, the Joy Baluch Bridge, the Port Wakefield overpass and road widening, and the Gawler line electrification project. This government recognises the importance of our road corridors for commuter and freight traffic to support the efficient movement of local, interstate and international freight.

In addition to creating better infrastructure, the budget provides for better services, with over $1.2 billion in health spending, including investing in regional hospitals and making vital upgrades to The Queen Elizabeth, Modbury and Noarlunga hospitals. At the same time, we are reactivating the Repat site to ensure that it remains a vital health precinct in the southern suburbs. The Repat site is an important part of South Australia's health infrastructure and the community will play a vital part in its reactivation. With Somerton Park, Glengowrie, Morphettville and Parkholme bordered by Oaklands Road, which becomes Daws Road, the site is very accessible to the people who live in these suburbs.

At the same time, this budget sees the introduction of the removal of payroll tax for all small businesses with annual taxable payrolls below $1.5 million. This will come into effect from 1 January 2019. Approximately 3,200 businesses will become exempt from payroll tax, with a saving of up to $44,550 per year. These reforms help grow the economy. It is about creating a level playing field for business that does not rely on politicians picking winners in business.

At the same time, all South Australians will benefit from the reduction in their emergency services levy, $360 million over four years. The first of those bills arrived in South Australian letterboxes recently, and the savings South Australians are now experiencing are well felt and well received. It is money they can elect to spend however they see fit, providing a $90-million boost to the South Australian economy this financial year.

The government is committed to making South Australia an affordable place to live, and affordable water prices are important in helping South Australians manage cost-of-living pressures. Funding of $1 million in 2018-19 has been allocated for the establishment and operation of an independent inquiry into water pricing in South Australia. This will inform the government if the methodology used to determine SA Water bills is reasonable.

The budget is also squarely focused on reducing the cost of energy for households and businesses and delivering the government's energy solution. It provides $184 million in expenditure to ensure more clean, reliable and affordable power for South Australians. The budget delivers on our election commitment for $100 million for the Home Battery Scheme to provide subsidies for home owners to purchase batteries. This scheme is a key component of the government's plan to deliver cheaper electricity to South Australian households and businesses.

An amount of $50 million for grid-scale storage is set aside to aid the development of new storage technologies to back up our abundant renewable energy and help stabilise South Australia's electricity network. Further, $30 million is set aside to better manage demand and help consumers benefit from helping to reduce peak demand to lower system costs. At the same time, the budget also seeks to accelerate delivery of an interconnector to New South Wales by supporting early works, with ElectraNet's modelling suggesting it will reduce bills by $30 per annum when operational. Of this, $4 million dollars is being provided as direct support in the budget and $10 million as underwriting to support early works.

The Marshall Liberal government has delivered a strong budget that delivers the reform South Australia needs and lays a strong foundation for the future. The budget achieves a return to surplus and projects surpluses across each year of the forward estimates while at the same time lowering taxes and investing in skills and infrastructure. It is a budget that is fair and responsible, that fulfils the commitments made to South Australians at the March 2018 election to lower costs, create jobs and provide better services.

The SPEAKER: Member for West Torrens.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (19:57): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Belatedly, congratulations on your nuptials. Long may your wife have her way over you, get her way. Get used to it; that is what happens in my house.

The SPEAKER: Thank you.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I am very disappointed with the budget, but not because I begrudge the Hon. Rob Lucas delivering his first budget after waiting 16 years. I am disappointed because he has not continued some of the work that I thought was a bipartisan commitment by parliament.

It is interesting that in all the remarks I have heard from members opposite there is one word Liberals do not mention—debt, the thing that we borrow from the bonds market; we go out and we borrow it and we promise to pay it back. The Liberals are very proud of saying that it is not their money, that it is taxpayers' money, and they are right. The money that members opposite are using is borrowed money. Not only is it borrowed money but it also increases each and every year across the forward estimates.

Think of this, Mr Speaker: the Liberals are actually saying with a straight face, actually claiming, that they are fixing a financial mess by increasing debt. My father ran a chicken shop. He is not a financial genius like members opposite, but if I said to him, 'I'm fixing a financial mess by borrowing more,' I know exactly what he would tell me—and I think members opposite know what he would say as well. You do not borrow your way out of trouble. If there was a financial mess that the government inherited, why increase debt?

The beauty of this budget for the opposition is that erstwhile government backbenchers who had absolutely zero say in the formulation of the budget will vote for it unanimously and go out and endorse it like the member for Newland. He is borrowing an extra $3.3 billion and will tell his community, 'By the way, for the privilege, I am privatising services at the Modbury Hospital. You are not getting the park-and-ride that you were promised, and I am closing a Service SA centre, and I can do nothing about it.' That is the member for Newland's new mantra.

I have to say, what he has not learnt, which he will learn, is that the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Did he notice that the member for Morialta's Service SA is just fine? Did he notice that the Premier's Service SA centre that services his electorate is just fine? Could this be a cabinet looking after themselves rather than looking after the marginal seats that they need to win? I am sure the member for Newland and the member King realise all this.

I think the other piece of genius work by the cabinet is to come out and flag over $40 million in cuts to bus routes and not say which bus routes they are. That takes a special kind of stupid because every potential bus route in the state is up for grabs, and members opposite will have absolutely no say in which ones are saved and which ones will go. Why? Because the government is outsourcing that decision-making process to an independent board, apparently, called the public transport board, which has not been established yet.

There is a word for this. It is called subjugation. Members opposite, the backbench, are watching a Treasurer who has snapped the elastic band that connects them to him. This is a man who is not running again. This is a man who spent over 40 years in parliament and will not face the people again and is making decisions that are impacting members opposite now, and he will not face the people in judgement in four years' time, but they will.

Members opposite, in their blissful ignorance, are letting him do it. Why? I thought that the Liberal Party was a party of individuals, that every vote was a conscience matter, that every decision was up for grabs. There is no solidarity in the Liberal Party. They do not force members, apparently, in Liberal caucuses to toe the line. The member for Morphett, the member for Newland and the member for King have accepted all these cuts in their local communities completely and without objection. Not one person has spoken out about any of the cuts to their local community.

If I was the member for Newland and I saw a Service SA centre being left open in what could be called a safe Liberal seat, and being closed in a marginal Liberal seat, what do you think Tom Kenyon would have said to me as Treasurer if I tried to do that to him? As I said, it takes a special kind of stupid to make these kinds of mistakes. But, then again, if you are not running again, what do you care? There is arrogance in the language: 'There is a new sheriff in town. There is a new government in town.' Is that not a great way to ingratiate yourself with the people of South Australia, especially since you do not have to face them again and you are superannuated to within an inch of your life?

Younger members, who have no such safety nets, are being forced to go out and sell this rubbish to the people of South Australia. I say to the backbench of the South Australian government: exert your influence, use your authority, use your numbers. There is a very simple rule, and the former prime minister of Australia used it well. It is the iron laws of arithmetic: there are more of you than there are of them. How is it that they are doing this to you? How is it that this is occurring?

What genius says they are fixing a financial mess while increasing debt in the last financial year by $417 million? That will go down well with 'the base', whatever the Liberal Party base is. It takes a special kind of genius in the 2018-19 financial year to increase debt by nearly half a billion dollars—$415 million—and tell the base that you are fixing a financial mess. How? By borrowing it. You are borrowing money to fix a financial mess.

It gets better. The Treasurer, who is retiring at the next election and not facing the people again, has committed the Liberal Party to borrow in 2019-20—indeed, the people of South Australia to borrow—a further $761 million from the MYBR, apparently in order to fix a financial mess. It gets better. He leaves the smoking turd on the table as he walks out the door. In 2020-21, he commits members opposite to borrowing over $1 billion, but apparently they are fixing a financial mess. There have only been, I think, two treasurers in the history of the federation and this state who have taken the state to zero debt. Peter Costello took the federal books to zero debt while he was treasurer and Kevin Foley took this state to zero debt.

Across the forward estimates in the MYBR, the last one that I delivered before the election, debt peaked at $6.63 billion. Under the financial genius of Rob Lucas, debt peaks at $7.749 billion. He takes total government debt, including the non-financial public sector debt, to $16 billion. In terms of the raw numbers, this Treasurer who is out there calling himself a financial genius as he sails off into the sunset is taking our debt levels to a higher watermark than when the State Bank collapsed, and members opposite are looking their branch members and constituents in the eye saying, 'We are fixing a financial mess,' because they are pointing to a surplus.

With the surpluses they point to, they point to a surplus estimate that gets to $211 million. What percentage is that of the entire state budget? Can anyone tell me opposite? Does the financial genius, when he is explaining to the caucus their decisions to borrow this extra $3.3 billion, tell them what percentage of the budget that is? Did he tell the member for Newland that for all his hard work during the campaign, for all that doorknocking, his reward is fewer bus routes, no park-and-ride and, of course, the closure of the Service SA centre, let alone the TAFE closures that were genius as well in his local area? Does he say that $211 million out of a potential $19 billion budget is not that much?

Mr McBride interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: That's right. The member for MacKillop points out it is minuscule. But members opposite say this is financially responsible. How is it financially responsible to borrow money to pay for tax cuts? No, I tell you it is important to note that this budget is a fraud. What this budget does is spend, and members opposite are borrowing money to pay for their futures at the expense of the people of South Australia. But it is only a select few.

The borrowing does not benefit the members in marginal seats: it benefits those in safe seats. I cannot imagine what Tom Kenyon would have said to me if, as treasurer, I said to him, 'Mate, I've got great news. I'm fixing a financial mess. I'm borrowing $3.3 billion, cutting land tax and payroll tax, but you, member for Newland, have to cop the closure of a TAFE, no park-and-ride, $40 million in bus route closures, no new buses being bought and a Service SA being closed.'

Mr Picton: And ambulances privatised.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: And of course, privatisation of the ambulance service between Modbury and Lyell McEwin. I think the honourable former member for Newland might have had a word or two to say to me, let alone what my colleagues around the cabinet table might have said. But of course, having a treasurer disconnect from reality, because they are not running again, is how you get budgets like this document.

There is a term that people use about blindness when it comes to surgery and being able to deal with the blood and the guts, being able to dissociate yourself from being a person, that surgeons use. It looks like the Treasurer has electoral blindness, and members opposite carry that burden for him—but what can they do? They are just the majority. What could they possibly do? It is not as if they are in a party where independence is somehow valued, where independence can be used to get an outcome, where you vote with your conscience rather than the party line.

It is not as if you are in some sort of liberal party, where these values that Menzies and Playford espoused are somehow the norm. Instead, they toe the line: they make cuts to health, they make cuts to education, they make cuts to public transport and they increase costs to the most vulnerable in our community in an unfair and cruel way.

Today, the shadow minister for health asked a question of the Premier: what does he have against people with HIV? How can you cut services to homeless people with HIV? How? What kind of political process did they go through to close key services in marginal seats? The members opposite, like good little sheep, nod their heads, not realising the power that they have. That is okay; let them get away with it. It suits us just fine.

We will go out and talk to the electorate. Whatever you do, members opposite, do not fight back. Be good backbenchers and do exactly what you are told and go and put out the rubbish that they are preparing for you, and tell the people of South Australia that you think that this is a good budget. It will suit us just fine, because this budget is not the beginning of a blueprint for long-term economic success or electoral success, this is a blueprint for electoral failure and financial mess.

Find me a Liberal anywhere in the country who thinks that increasing debt unsustainably is a good idea. The Premier apparently told the house that debt has never, ever, ever ever been cheaper in the history of humanity. They were his words, and then three days later, three of the four banks lifted interest rates and the bond market went up. Genius. The man is a genius. This Treasurer has flagged to the bonds market, 'We're borrowing an extra $3.3 billion,' in case they did not know.

The other kind of special genius is to put in place a mining minister who hates the mining industry. This is also a special kind of stupid. For the life of me, I did not understand some of the decisions made in the mining sector within the budget process. There were dramatic cuts made to the department. Okay, there is cost-cutting across all agencies and mining wears the same shoes as everyone else, but I go back to my original point: but they are increasing debt, so what is the use?

The other point is that they talk about it being a low cost for business. The third largest employer in this state is the mining industry, and what has the Liberal Party done in this budget? It has increased their taxes by abolishing the new mine rate. Not only did it do that but it said to them, 'You're not welcome in South Australia if you do this type of behaviour.' I have to say that I think it is the most anti-mining, anti-resources budget I have ever seen. There are people across the country who are shocked at what the Liberal Party is doing to this industry in South Australia. We have the potential in this state not only to overtake Queensland and New South Wales but to rival Western Australia in mining activity, whether it is in oil and gas, copper, gold or uranium.

The Liberal Party has just said to any new prospective miners in South Australia, 'Come here at your peril. We are abolishing the new mine rate, and we arbitrarily impose moratoriums not based on science or regulatory processes but based on votes. Not only that, we will flip our decision on an administrative ban on unconventional gas in the South-East to a legislative ban without any consultation.' What a great investment signal that is for people in the mining industry. They then say, quite proudly, that they will not pick winners, unless of course you are a battery manufacturer, in which case we will pick winners. Then they say, 'We've got four subsidies,' of course that is unless you are a battery manufacturer, in which case we will subsidise you.

Consistency is important in politics. Why? Because then you are not exposed for hypocrisy, like pretending that you are cleaning up a financial mess while increasing debt, while imposing harsher punishment on marginal seat holders and their communities, while enriching those in safer Liberal seats. I just wonder whether the member for Newland had the ticker to get up in caucus and say to the Treasurer, 'Why are you leaving SA Service centres open in safe Liberal seats and closing mine? Why are you closing my TAFE? Why aren't you building my park-and-ride? Why aren't you giving me extra bus services? Why have you cancelled $100 million worth of new buses on the most patronised and well-used public transport route in the state, the O-Bahn?'

Personally, I think the member for Newland and the member for King kicked a cat or broke a mirror before they entered parliament because they have been, without a doubt, since their election, the two unluckiest members of parliament in this place. I can only surmise that the 40-year-plus veteran Treasurer just thinks that they will not be here after the election and that they do not matter. That is all I can think of—all I can think it is. I cannot think of any other reason you would make cuts to those communities in the way he has made them.

It was my great honour and pleasure to be the Treasurer of South Australia. It will be one of the greatest honours of my life; being entrusted with the state's finances is a very serious privilege. But what I think is not appropriate is to have someone as Treasurer who is not facing the people again. The people need to sit in judgement of the people who handle the finances, the people who administer their state. They need to be held accountable.

Unfortunately, in the Westminster system, in a majority parliament, it is very difficult—and I do not mean this in any disrespectful way to the Speaker—to keep ministers to account, because majority rules. They have the numbers and it is very difficult to hold ministers to account. What we do have, though, that equalises all of us every four years is elections. Rob Lucas faces no such accountability because the Liberal Party think it is appropriate to have a Treasurer in place who is increasing debt by $3.3 billion, making up stories about a financial mess, but who will not face the people again. That is inappropriate. The Liberal Party should tell the people of South Australia who will be the next Treasurer and do that immediately.

I also believe that, in the area of transport, the junior minister has let down the people of South Australia terribly. Again, we still do not have a tram to go up North Terrace after it was 'set in stone'. If you cannot get that right, how can you get anything else right?

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (20:18): It gives me great pleasure to rise today and speak in support of the Liberal Marshall government's first budget. Unlike what we have heard from the other side—all negativity and gloom—there has been a good story in South Australia, particularly regional South Australia. It is refreshing that our government has seen fit to hand down a budget that is focused on supporting regional communities, businesses and families rather than one that does not consider people beyond the tollgate, like those on the other side.

This is a welcome change from budgets handed down by the previous Labor governments. It is a budget for the whole state, a budget which is fair and responsible and which will stand the state in good stead for economic growth over the coming years. It is a budget that has recognised that regional communities require investment in infrastructure and health services. The government, by delivering on its election promises, through this budget is creating a climate that has targeted investment to support regional communities and businesses to see them thrive.

It is lifting the regions, their roads, their hospitals and aged-care facilities from the funding abyss created by the previous Labor government and is seeking to help make up for the backlog of neglected roads, CFS fire stations, hospitals and other infrastructure and services required for our regions to flourish. The budget delivers for regions through the $15 million per year Regional Growth Fund. This program is targeted at unlocking new economic activity and will act to strengthen our regional communities. I look forward to seeing the opportunities of innovation and economic drive that will spring from this initiative.

The $10 million delivered through the budget to address mobile phone blackspots will act to improve mobile phone coverage—another stark area of neglect in regional communities that is a legacy of the previous Labor government. The mobile phone blackspot fund will provide opportunities to leverage funding from a range of sources, including the commonwealth government. Mobile blackspots are all too prevalent in regional communities, impacting on people's ability to do business, impacting on families and critically impacting on the ability of our emergency services to respond and manage emergency incidents.

The improvement of regional health services is targeted in the budget, with $140 million over 10 years committed to country hospital capital works and, importantly, $20 million over four years identified to develop and implement a rural workforce strategy. This investment will assist in addressing the dire shortage of health practitioners in regional areas and start to address the backlog of capital works in hospitals that have been operating under difficult conditions, brought on by inaction and neglect by the former government.

In my own electorate, the investment of $1 million this year to upgrade the fire protection system at the Lighthouse Lodge aged-care home in Kingston is much needed to ensure the safety of its residents. In the adjacent electorate of Mount Gambier, there is an investment of $2.1 million to expand and upgrade the renal dialysis unit at the Mount Gambier hospital. This is a benefit to my electorate because it is a major health precinct at Mount Gambier, and we will have constituents use these facilities. Two renal dialysis unit chairs will be added, enabling eight more patients to receive treatment in Mount Gambier every week. This is a great outcome for both electorates.

I cannot talk to the budget measures without recognising the delivery of a significant election promise for my own electorate of MacKillop, which will see the completion of the Penola bypass within two years. This project is an important collaboration between the state, federal and local governments. On this point, I would like to acknowledge the hard work of my commonwealth counterpart, the member for Barker, Tony Pasin, who has continued to be a strong advocate for the bypass, along with the Wattle Range Council. It must be highlighted that the Penola bypass has been 60 years in the making—or waiting—as it was first suggested 60-odd years ago.

Giving credit where it may be due in some slight shape or form, the previous government did build half a bypass at Penola, but then it just walked away from the rest of the construction and completing it. It is a bit like the way they looked after regional areas: they only half did the job. The investment of $14½ million will realise the investment of the commonwealth's contribution of $9 million that until now has been unspent by the former Labor government, who lacked the drive and commitment to finalise this project, the Penola bypass.

With this funding commitment, the Liberal Marshall government will be able to finish off the final section of this important roadway. The construction of the bypass will ensure that all heavy vehicle traffic will be diverted around the Penola main street, making the township safer and more appealing to the many thousands of visitors who stop to enjoy, shop or eat at one of the fine cafes, or who pause to take in the historic sites of this beautiful historic town. I have been a strong advocate for the Penola bypass, and it is great to see the Marshall government deliver for the MacKillop electorate to enable the completion of this significant infrastructure project.

The budget shows that we are listening to the people of regional South Australia. The recent Business SA regional business survey highlighted that in MacKillop both skilled and unskilled workers are in short supply. I am pleased to see our government addressing the issue of skilled workers in regions and across the state on a number of fronts through the creation of more than 20,000 new apprenticeships and traineeships to ensure that people are job ready. There is a reinvigoration of TAFE SA, which will be given a fresh start, to ensure the continuation of service delivery, that quality standards are met and that there is compliance with national vocational education training standards.

The flexible apprenticeships program, enabling students to complete their SACE while commencing an apprenticeship, is absolutely another positive aspect to address the issue of training and skills shortages. I highlight that there are many places in my region where we are short on workers and we are short on skills. These apprenticeships can only go in some shape or fashion to actually addressing these issues.

We have just heard from the member for West Torrens. Before I finish, I just cannot let it go unsaid: the member has, I would say in the nicest possible way, just rambled on. He highlighted 'a financial mess' at least 20 times. Ironically, he is responsible for exactly that. He is critical of the government taking the debt, which, in what I have seen of the figures, I understand is $14½ billion to $16 billion. In my terms, it does not amount to $3 billion but does add $1½ billion.

The point is that we are acknowledging—and I think the member for West Torrens is, too—that there is $14½ billion of debt that they have left to us with no means or idea of how to pay it back, where we go from here and how we address this situation. All he can do is throw stones at us. If he goes back to the nineties—and maybe his memory does go back that far—when the Liberal Party came to government after the State Bank debacle, the Labor Party left an $8 billion debt and the Liberal Party did its absolute uttermost to bring the financial situation under control.

It tried to get the debts down and took the responsibility upon itself, just to be ousted from government for doing exactly that. Maybe that is what you on the other side are most disappointed about: the fact that we are not going to come and fix your mess up straightaway, that we are not going to unravel the mess that you have created. Of all the things I have seen, I want us first of all to fix up what you have neglected. As I highlighted in my speech, regional areas such as my electorate have missed out. I cannot see why we should miss out on another four years of funding so that we can fix up where you have spent all the money on what I would call mismanagement.

The member for West Torrens talked about how he was really disappointed about bipartisan spending on projects. He thought that the Liberal government might just be part of what they had been part of for 16 years. I think this highlights that, when you have been in government for 16 years, perhaps you have blinkers on, perhaps you become complacent, perhaps you become deaf.

Whatever the case, I do not think that you have really understood that, when the Liberal Party were on the other side of the chamber where you are today, we did not actually agree with what you were doing to this state. We had another plan to put in place. I think that is what is important about what we have done in this first budget. Although I do not think that it is going to meet all the criteria we would like as a party, for how you have left it it is the best we can do at the start. That is what is most important.

The previous speaker, the member for West Torrens, talked about borrowed money in regard to fixing up a mess. Well, some businesses actually borrow more money to fix a problem. He may have never done that in his life, but I belong to a business where we have a debt level and we actually increase it to increase our prosperity. That is not unheard of. If your business is running well, and you have a great cash flow and good returns because commodity prices are strong, you can borrow more money to perhaps fix a mess. I would not rule that out.

He talked about cabinet looking after themselves. Yes, we have a cabinet. We have a strong leadership group that has been in power for at least one term and more. We will be guided by them, we will take their wise counsel and we will act as a party. He asked why we are doing this and why we would not cause an uproar. Well, we do not have to do that. We can actually operate as a party. We will be led by the front bench that we believe, that is running our finances. I believe that, in all shapes and fashions, we are being looked after.

I highlight to you the seat of MacKillop. It has absolutely had a very good budget. We have been looked after better than we were under a Labor government—surprise, surprise. The Liberal Party is talking about bus routes, that we might close some in the city, and the member for West Torrens is critical of the member for Newland for accepting this. I have bus routes that are closed in my electorate. I have schoolchildren who cannot get on the buses because there is no bus that they will fit on to. That was left over by the previous government.

To me, that is not a very sustainable situation at all. I have a township in MacKillop that had to go and buy their own bus and pay for their own driver to have their own South Australian students picked up, yet you say that we are closing bus routes. Maybe if they need closing, they do not have anyone on them. My buses do have people on them. My buses have children who need education. That did not worry you over there, though, did it?

The member talked about the mining outcomes. He thinks that we have a budget that is absolutely bad for mining. It could not be more to the contrary. My understanding is that we are breaking down the rules, we are breaking down the regulations, to allow mining. We know that when we—

Mr Picton: Not in the South-East.

Mr McBRIDE: I am glad you brought that up over there.

An honourable member: In the wilderness.

Mr McBRIDE: In the wilderness over there, correct. We have a ministerial directive over 10 years not to allow fracking to take place on the Limestone Coast. We have just legislated, or attempted to legislate, through this parliament, when it gets through the upper house, and it will not change. Nothing changes if we stay in power.

We still have mining companies coming into our region wanting to drill a well. There is a well called Haselgrove-3, which I reminded the parliament about last time I spoke on this. I thought it only had the highest flow rate in South Australia's history; it turns out to be the highest flow rate in Australian history. It is so huge that the potential is unknown.

There is another business down that way that wants to drill a well conventionally, and hopefully it will find the same prosperity as Haselgrove-3. What are we going to try to do with that? We want to put it towards electricity or put it towards business. Why would we want to do that? Because we want to fix up the mess that the other government left behind. We want to actually lower power prices. That is one of the things that you have not said anything about in this budget. The power prices that the government has put on to this state over the last 10 years—

Mr Pederick: Former government.

Mr McBRIDE: Former government, thank you—the former government put on to this state are nothing like the damage that you are talking about in this budget. You should hang your heads in shame for what you have done to power prices. We can only get the power prices down by 10 or 20 per cent, but we know that the power prices have over doubled—200 per cent in 10 years. It is out of control.

Then you talk about the most vulnerable in society being hurt by our rental on public housing and the most vulnerable being at risk of our budget. Power prices did a lot more damage than our rental ever did, or ever will do, and those on the other side of the chamber know this. You know they cannot keep warm, you know they cannot keep cool, you know they cannot turn the power points on, because power is too expensive for them. In 16 years, you only made it worse, not better.

I will wrap up and say that I look forward to implementing this Liberal Marshall government's first budget. We know that many of our state's issues will not be fixed overnight. However, this budget provides a strong foundation for the state to invest in priorities that will grow businesses, industry and the economy. The previous Labor government conveniently forgot about regional South Australia. I am proud to be part of a government that is putting the regions firmly back on the map. I commend the bill to members.

Mr PICTON (Kaurna) (20:31): I am sure the member for Newland is reassured by that speech from the member for MacKillop, that despite all the cuts, all the privatisations happening out in the north-east, in the very marginal seat that he is going to try to defend, things are fine in the seat of MacKillop. This is a good budget for the seat of MacKillop, where probably nine out of 10 people vote for the Liberal Party and they take lists of the people who vote for Labor in some of those towns.

It is fine that there is a whole raft of pain being inflicted upon the people of Newland because the member for Newland can go and doorknock in that area and say, 'Don't worry. Things are going to be fine in the South-East because that's what the member there has told me, despite the fact that TAFEs are closing in the north-east, despite the fact that we are privatising ambulances and putting patients at risk in the north-east, despite the fact that we are closing the Service SA branch and telling people they have to go all the way to Tranmere and a massive line to get any type of service in Service SA.'

Despite all those things, things are going to be fine in the South-East. That shows some of the perverse logic that we are seeing in this budget. It is certainly something that we will be highlighting every single day leading up to the next election because the Liberal Party, after having been in the wilderness for 16 years, has been elected largely on the basis of support in the north-eastern suburbs, in those marginal seats. What have they done? Within months of getting to power, they have betrayed the trust that those people put in them and have inflicted the most savage cuts of this budget on those people in the north-eastern suburbs.

Whether you are a public transport user, a hospital user, a Service SA user, a Housing Trust tenant or somebody who wants to go to TAFE, you are copping the brunt of this budget. The member for King and the member for Newland are going to have us telling people in that area about the pain that is being inflicted by this Liberal government every single day leading up to the next election.

I would particularly like to highlight tonight what we have seen in this budget in terms of health. Obviously, as the shadow minister for health, it is the key area of interest for me in terms of this budget. What we have seen in health is yet again the same cuts, the same privatisations, the same closures, and a complete disregard in so many areas of what was promised before the election. We had very clear promises from the Premier, from the now health minister before the election, saying that they were going to invest significantly in health, saying that they were going to fix problems in health. There was nothing in health that they could not do, that they could not fix, that they did not have an easy answer to.

There was no talk of inflicting any pain in health services whatsoever from the Liberal Party. It was only going to be rosier, happier and better under their management. Now we see the truth of the matter in their budget documents, where we see cuts. We see very significant cuts to the health budget; we see very significant cuts to doctors and nurses and also to other important workers across the health system; and we see privatisations. We see the privatisation of SA Pathology, SA Medical Imaging and ambulance transfers.

We also see closures. We see the closure of the independent voice for health consumers in this state and we see the closure of HIV services. People you would think we would want to be supporting the most are getting their services ripped away from them by the Liberal Party in this budget, which is an absolute disgrace. What did they promise before the election? Firstly, of course, the now Premier very clearly said, 'We do not have a privatisation agenda.' He said that in the PSA debate. That was a solemn promise from the Premier before the election. It has been completely broken in this budget.

We had the now health minister going around saying, 'A Treasury-driven health cuts plan is no way to deliver better health outcomes,' and, 'You can't improve health outcomes by reducing health services.' What we are now seeing is that we do have a Treasury-driven cuts agenda in health. In fact, we have heard from a number of people that the health minister's office was not even involved in discussions about many of these cuts and that they were surprised about many of these cuts. It was all driven by the Treasurer, Rob Lucas, and his office, and the health minister and his department were not involved at all. So this is a completely Treasury-driven health cuts agenda that is being inflicted upon the state.

Just look at what they are projecting for the next year. For the next year, they are projecting to have fewer staff, to the tune of 884 fewer across our health system. For whatever reason you think that there are issues in the health system—and no-one is doubting that there have been a number of different health issues; even the minister is acknowledging that he is confronting a number of health issues at the moment in our hospitals and outside—no-one would tell you that reducing the number of staff in our health system by 900 people is going to solve any issue in our health system.

People want to see more doctors and nurses, more people working in our health system, but this budget projects to reduce the number of staff by up to 900 within the next nine months. That is very highly focused in two areas. One is the Department for Health, where they are projecting that 300 people will go, and the other is the Central Adelaide Local Health Network, which covers the Royal Adelaide Hospital, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, SA Pathology, SA Dental Services and other services, where they are projecting that 850 staff will have to go.

Of course, we know that the Liberal Party, in one of their first moves, have brought on board the liquidators and administrators KordaMentha, an organisation with no experience in terms of health policy or in running health services. This is a company that comes in if a business is going bad and basically works out what to sell. They have been brought in to try to cut those hundreds of staff, to cut significant funding from the budget of the Central Adelaide Local Health Network. We know that some diagnostic reports have been given to the government already from KordaMentha. They have not been released.

The minister said that he has not received their final report and that that is apparently coming in the next couple of weeks. But, even then, he said that he is not necessarily going to release that report immediately. We think that absolutely needs to be in the public eye, and we know that staff across the health system are very concerned about what this is going to mean. Patients should be very concerned about what this is going to mean because these cuts are going to hit very hard in terms of our hospital services. Hospital services that are already under the pump are going to get much worse because of the actions of this government in bringing in KordaMentha to slash and burn the Central Adelaide Local Health Network. While they have been saying, 'We are investing extra money in health,' they are giving with one hand but taking with the other. They have added another $700 million worth of cuts to health across the forward estimates. So, while they have injected more with one hand, they have taken it away with the other.

Of course, nothing shows the lack of foresight and the significant broken promises than what has been decided in this budget for SA Pathology and SA Medical Imaging. Over the past four years, clearly these areas were looked at in detail and we decided we were not going to cut these significantly and we were not going to look at privatising them. What is the first step the Liberals took when they came in? They cut SA Pathology to the tune of $105 million over three years and they cut SA Medical Imaging by $18 million over three or four years. They are very significant cuts being imposed.

While that might not be what you think of when you go through the front doors of a hospital, those pathology and imaging services are absolutely essential to the running of a hospital. They are absolutely essential to making sure that patients are seen to on time, quickly and get good results. We have some expert people working in our pathology and imaging services in South Australia. If we go down the path the Liberal Party is proposing of, firstly, significantly cutting those services by over $100 million and then saying, 'After this we are probably going to put them all up for privatisation,' and the local health networks go with the lowest bidder, then we will see the death of SA Pathology, something which started through the IMVS, a renowned institute for a very long period of South Australia's history, and which then turned into SA Pathology.

That would be the end of it. That would be the end of the teaching and research that happened there. That would be the end of the professional, expert care we get through the clinicians there, who are able to do very complex work on behalf of patients in the health system, and also on behalf of patients in the primary healthcare sector. If you go to your GP and a complex piece of work needs to be done, it is likely that it will be sent to SA Pathology, not to a private contractor, because we have the biggest labs in our public system because we are running them not for profit, we are running them for the people of South Australia.

Without SA Pathology, what we are going to see is private labs sending samples interstate. As I was told today, potentially some private labs are sending samples overseas to be tested. That is the future that the Liberal Party is proposing in its privatisation agenda for our public hospital system. We do not believe that clinicians who work in our public hospital system should be there for profit. They should be there as public employees for the good of South Australians.

Of course, this was not something that was talked about before the election. In fact, the minister went out of his way to criticise previous attempts and consideration of reforms in this area. He went out of his way to say things such as he would be consulting with staff before any reform in SA Pathology was considered. None of that occurred. This came as a complete surprise to all the workforce in SA Pathology and SA Medical Imaging. They have not had any notification from the minister, and their representatives have not had any phone calls from the minister to discuss this.

They had to take the unprecedented step of coming to parliament today to listen to question time—when we were unfortunately unenlightened by the answers given—because they are completely in the dark about how this came about, why promises were broken, why privatisation promises were broken and what this is going to mean for their services, their jobs and the work they do on behalf of patients in South Australia.

We also know that this is something that various key members of the government have previously opposed when they were in opposition. Members of the government, on the front bench, went out of their way in opposition to say that privatisation of SA Pathology would be very bad for their communities. The Minister for Energy, who represents the Minister for Health in this house, said to his local newspaper that privatising SA Pathology in Port Augusta would be a very poor move. Absolutely. We agree. Why does he now not agree with that? We think that there will be an impact upon regional communities.

SA Pathology, as it is there for the public good and not to turn a profit, has a huge network through regional South Australia. The privatisation and significant cuts to that service are only going to have adverse impacts on country people, country hospitals and country primary health care through their GPs. It is something that the Liberal Party should be opposing, not putting forward as a measure in this year's budget.

Another element of this is that, potentially, we are going to see higher costs for people in the community because of the competition that the public provider, through SA Pathology, provides to the community sector. It means that the very large percentage of tests, blood tests and other samples that are done in South Australia are bulk billed. Without public provider competition, we are likely to see bulk billing rates drop and patients facing more out-of-pocket costs. This supposed saving that the government is trying to achieve, and also their ideologically driven privatisation agenda, is not only going to cause bad impacts on our public patients but is also going to cause bad impacts on patients in their GP rooms across South Australia.

In the parliament today, we also discussed a very cruel cut, a cut where the government has pulled the entire funding available to a key service for people with HIV in South Australia. It is a service called Cheltenham Place. It is run by Centacare, and it is highly respected and well utilised by people who have HIV. The government have not said, 'We think there is an issue here; we need to reform it.' They have not said, 'We want to put this out for tender for another provider.' They have just said, 'We are going to cut this funding entirely. We are not going to have a specialised HIV service in this state anymore. People with HIV will not have that specialised outpatient support available to them.' That is an absolutely cruel cut.

Of course, this is not something that was discussed at all before the election, I do not think it is something the people of South Australia support and it is not something that even saves very much money. In fact, Centacare, who run the service, have examples and evidence to show that the running of their service for a relatively small amount of money—to the tune of about $400,000—saves at least double that in terms of emergency admissions and admissions to hospital that we would otherwise see. So this is a short-sighted cut that is going to end up actually costing the health system more money in the end. It is completely indefensible. It is completely a surprise to everybody in the sector.

In fact, it is pretty clear that the Liberal Party did not even know what they were doing when they cut this funding because in minister Wade's press release, which he put out with the Orwellian title of 'Sustainable, efficient health services', which was his release where he dumped all the cuts that he was making, he called it a focus on 'homeless individuals with HIV'. This infuriated Centacare because it showed that they did not have a basic understanding of the service that was being provided before they went around cutting it. Of course, they did not discuss it with them at all.

We have also seen a very cruel and short-sighted cut in terms of completely closing and removing all funding from the Health Consumers Alliance. This is the body that represents patients in South Australia. This is the body that independently stands up to hospitals and the health administration and goes in to bat for patients. Of course, we have the AMA that represents doctors, the ANMF that represents nurses and a whole range of other organisations that represent different perspectives on the health system, but this is the body that represents patients.

This is absolutely important to making sure that we have a patient-led and consumer-led health service that cares about people. It is absolutely important to be able to have a body that can independently stand up to government and that can go around and train up consumers to stand up on their own behalf at hospitals across the whole state. We know it is important because every single other state has one. Every single other state has central government funding that goes in to provide that service because who else is going to do it? You are not going to rattle the can around in the emergency department. It needs a government hand there supporting it.

That is why were very glad to support it over our term of government, and we think it is absolutely short-sighted to cut it. We know that this was a very rushed job because there was no discussion with them beforehand. In fact, the body was sitting in the stakeholders' lockup and somebody knocked on their shoulder and said, 'Isn't this your body having all its funding cut?' That is the way communication happens under the Marshall government at the moment. That is how they found out that all their funding was going to be cut and the voice of consumers was going to end in South Australia.

There are a whole range of other, different cuts that are happening, particularly in areas such as sexual health services in Shine SA, areas that particularly keep people out of hospital, reduce admissions to emergency departments, reduce other admissions to hospital and save the government money overall. We had minister Wade, before he was elected, running around saying he wanted to invest more in prevention. This was his first chance, and he has cut this money. He has cut preventative money across the board in these important areas, which is going to cost the budget more overall.

We are seeing more privatisation, sadly, in terms of our ambulance services. At the moment we have ambulance services running between Modbury Hospital and Lyell McEwin Hospital, sometimes looking after quite unwell people who need to have paramedics or other trained ambulance officers there to support them. The government is going to put that out for contract, for tender, and the level of care that will be provided to those patients will be less. Patients who potentially could be seriously ill could be at risk due to this privatisation.

People at Modbury know all about what privatisation means because they saw their hospital privatised under the previous government. Now they are seeing their local ambulance services privatised under this government. It was not promised before the election; it was not discussed before the election. It has been pulled out of the Treasury drawer and imposed upon the people of the north-east. We will be highlighting for the electors of King and the electors of Newland this broken promise on privatisation that is being inflicted upon them.

We are also seeing money being put into boards, money being put into setting up extra bureaucracies to the tune of $15 million over the forward estimates. This is money that could be going into health services, that could be going into helping patients and that could be going into addressing these HIV cuts and other cuts but is going into extra bureaucracy, extra duplication, extra fragmentation across the system. None of that is going to help any patients. All this shows the wrong priorities: cuts, closures, privatisations and broken promises.

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (20:52): I rise to commend the Marshall Liberal government for a firm yet fair state budget. Treasurer Rob Lucas promised the budget will not 'end at the tollgate', and I am pleased to finally see a focus on the regions, which contribute so much to the state's economy. In my electorate of Mount Gambier, a city of more than 27,000 people, residents want to see tangible investment in their region from the state government. They want to see funds directed towards areas such as health services, education, mobile blackspots, roads and infrastructure.

The 2018 budget has delivered in many of those areas. Probably the biggest win for my electorate was the $2.1 million to upgrade and expand the Mount Gambier hospital's renal dialysis unit. This funding will bring about a major and lifesaving change for local patients undergoing renal dialysis and, importantly, bring Mount Gambier hospital's renal dialysis services in line with other regional hospitals in the state.

The funding of the statewide meningococcal B vaccination program is also great news, and this began as a grassroots campaign in my electorate. In March, Mount Gambier resident Alli Schleef started a petition calling on the state Liberal government to fund the B strain vaccine for children across the state. That petition was signed by 4,600 people from my electorate, and thanks to their voices this vaccination program will help prevent more unnecessary deaths from this disease.

Funding to complete the Penola bypass was also very well received in my community. It is hard to believe, but the idea for the bypass first began in the 1950s, showing just how patient regional residents are in waiting for major projects to be funded. Two years ago, the bypass was dubbed 'the road to nowhere' after work ground to a halt with just the first stage completed. It was quite unbelievable that you would drive halfway around this bypass, then hit a T-junction and have to come back into the township of Penola and then continue on the main road.

The road that will now be completed will allow up to 500 heavy vehicles a day to bypass Penola's main street and allow this small South-East town to flourish without having B-double trucks shake the buildings when they pass. It will also allow tourists using the Southern Ocean Drive touring route to visit Penola and our internationally renowned Coonawarra wine region without having to deal with cattle and log trucks. However, I would like to see part of the $315 million of the regional roads and infrastructure fund allocated to specific regional projects in the area of Mount Gambier. Billions of dollars have been spent upgrading and maintaining city roads; however, the regions have to wait to see extra highway lanes, shoulder sealing and even the fixing of potholes.

The injection of $10 million towards addressing some of the state's biggest mobile blackspots is also welcome, and this is an issue that I have ranked as one of my main priorities. In the city, it is taken for granted that you can get mobile phone service everywhere, but in my region the service drops out and is unreliable in many areas. Even at the Glenburnie saleyards, a multimillion dollar livestock centre, there is no tower, and it is a standing joke that agents have to climb the fences to get service. I have nominated several priority sites in my electorate as a matter of urgency and look forward to this work commencing.

As a former educator, I was pleased to see a record spend in this year's state budget on education—the biggest in the state's history. This investment is good news for the next generation of South Australians and will help develop and prepare them for their future. Along with the big ticket items, including $27.7 million to transition year 7 students into high school, it was good to see smaller yet no less important additions, such as a review of school bus services in regional areas.

I was also pleased to see that all graduating teachers will have to pass a numeracy and literacy test. This is one area where we need an increase in focus. The quality of our teachers is paramount. In fact, in many studies it has been shown that the level of a student will not overtake the level of a teacher. So, if we have teachers who are barely passing year 12 graduating as teachers, unfortunately the level of attainment for those students will not surpass the level of their teacher.

Increasing sporting vouchers from $50 to $100 for primary school children is another budget measure that I welcome. Sport is important for getting children outside, active, participating in a team environment and having fun. It develops positive self-esteem, teamwork and cooperation skills that continue well into adulthood. Many talented players from my region have gone on to become sporting stars at a national level. Many families have children playing multiple sports, and this increase will help those families that may be struggling with household bills to continue with their children's sporting commitments.

On that point, the rising cost of living and the subsequent impact on household budgets is an issue my office hears about every day. The $360 million reduction in the emergency services levy will mean a saving of around $145 for the average South Australian household per year. Measures such as these will have a positive impact upon household budgets as will the Home Battery Scheme, which will allow 40,000 homes to invest in battery storage systems. The reliability and security of the state's power supply is an issue affecting every South Australian, and the $184 million energy solution is a good start towards addressing our energy concerns now and into the future.

I have often stated that I believe that renewable energy is the way forward. Mount Gambier is home to one of Australia's most significant forestry regions. It has been stated that renewable energy from timber waste products could supply more than 5 per cent of South Australia's entire electricity needs. My region is well placed to lead the way in renewable technologies, such as wood biomass. All it needs is support and investment.

While it was good to see $192 million invested in regional health services, our region has two very specific needs that were not addressed in this year's state budget: drug rehabilitation and mental health services. Our region needs drug rehabilitation centres that offer ongoing support and treatment options for those in the crisis of addiction rather than short-term populist measures. Methamphetamine (ice) is having a devastating effect in regional communities, particularly Mount Gambier. People are losing their jobs, families and livelihoods because of this insidious drug.

Regional families with an addicted family member have an additional problem: the tyranny of distance to access treatment and facilities. In Mount Gambier, the largest regional city in South Australia, there are no dedicated drug rehabilitation beds. Six rehabilitation beds for Mount Gambier were announced in October last year as part of the state government's 'Stop the Hurt' strategy. They were supposed to be operational by early 2018, but here we are in September and still no beds.

People needing detox facilities or long-term rehabilitation have to go across the border or to Adelaide five hours away. The waitlist for counselling and support services is often months long. I am heartened to see the state government has pledged to run a trial of the intensive outpatient Matrix drug program in the Riverland region after being launched in Adelaide earlier this year.

The results of this program, which takes a vastly different approach to traditional drug treatment programs, have seen significant reductions in methamphetamine use and relapse. More than 75 per cent of participants use drugs for five days or less during the program and 48 per cent did not use at all. It is obviously early days and more work and research needs to be completed to determine the long-term results; however, I would like to state on the record right now that I would like to see Mount Gambier become one of those regional trial sites.

In the area of mental health, the same issues are occurring for those in regional communities: long waitlists and not enough services or ongoing support. They are issues that require long-term solutions, not stopgap measures, and I will continue to lobby strongly for more funding, resources and facilities in these areas.

The area of regional tourism deserves a notable mention, as I come from a region gifted with incredible assets that merit greater recognition on the state's tourism agenda. In the South-East, we are lucky enough to have some of Australia's most incredible natural features: volcanoes, sinkholes and cave systems, which are internationally renowned and attract thousands of tourists each year. Seeing Mount Gambier's Blue Lake in summertime, when it has undergone its spectacular natural colour change, has to be seen to be believed.

The activation of these natural assets in developing a master plan to guide our city's future tourism projects is a priority during my time as the member for Mount Gambier. Although it is good to see an increased focus on attracting major events to South Australia with the $40 million event bid fund, there needs to be regional inclusion.

It was announced that Mount Gambier's Sir Robert Helpmann Theatre will share in $1 million with three other regional theatres for substantial sustainment works. I would like to see more dedicated funding towards arts events and projects for the regions. A case in point is the Mount Gambier Fringe festival. Run in conjunction with the successful Adelaide Fringe, the event has gone from strength to strength since it was first run in 2017, and this year attracted more than 12,000 people to the event. Next year's event is going ahead with approximately $20,000 less in the kitty from the state government. By comparison, the 2019 Adelaide Festival received $1.3 million in this year's state budget, bringing total government funding to more than $9 million.

But let's end on a good note. In regional areas, 60 per cent of the population engage in volunteer work, whether it is running a barbecue at Bunnings for a sports club or donating their time to the local animal shelter. These people are the backbone of our community—those who actively donate their time for a good cause. The removal of the $60 volunteer screening fee is a small gesture but one that will reward our volunteers and benefit many regional organisations and events that depend heavily on volunteers to run. One of these is our famous Generations in Jazz festival, which has grown exponentially over 30 years thanks to the valuable contribution of volunteers, some of whom return year after year. I commend the government for rewarding our hardworking volunteers.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (21:04): I am proud to rise in support of the state budget 2018-19. This is the first budget of the new Marshall Liberal government. I am mindful of the substantial challenge that we face after 16 years in opposition. The former Labor government's financial mismanagement of our state during that time has given us an enormous task, one we are well aware of. We must return the budget to a sustainable position and restore confidence to the state. It is a challenge we relish and an opportunity we have taken up with both hands. I commend the Treasurer for his decisive action and determined economic leadership—safe hands indeed.

The Marshall Liberal government is committed to its election promises: creating jobs, lowering the cost of doing business, reducing the cost of living and providing better services for South Australians. We have made good on each and every one of our election commitments. That is important because we are committed to building, in our communities across the state, confidence in the way we go about our work. We want a respectful dialogue and we want to be known for doing as we say we will do. We must restore credibility in government.

The former Labor government told us, in its last budget, that it would achieve a $12 million surplus for the last financial year. The fact was a crushing $397 million deficit. We will not shy away from cleaning up the mess, but we recognise the reality. If we are to build confidence in government within the community, then we must take responsibility, we must do as we say we will do and we must get on with doing the job in a professional way.

This requires a pragmatic and disciplined approach. We cannot change what we have inherited, but we can shape a better future for the state by making hard decisions and delivering on our commitments. As evidenced over the last 16 years, not a single job is created by sitting back and putting a hand out.

At the very core of all we are doing in the new Marshall Liberal government is a strong focus on delivering a future in this state that we and our children can be proud of, opportunities for them to stay here and thrive. We want to excite and inspire the next generation by giving them the opportunity to find secure employment, and that means proper training for jobs for the future and the opportunities we intend to create. To do this, we must compete with the other states, and we must ensure that our budget is one that will ensure growth in the economy.

We are lowering the cost of doing business in South Australia by removing payroll tax for small business. The new threshold will mean that we are effectively abolishing payroll tax, that insidious tax, for all small business in this state. We are sending a clear message that the state is genuinely open for business, for investment, and that the door is open for the employment of more South Australians. We are going to spend over $150 million on reducing payroll tax and we are going to spend a further $95 million on land tax relief.

The challenge is also to lower the cost of doing government business. Government revenue exceeded $19 billion in the last year, and we must ensure that we do all we can to reduce excessive government spending so that we can return the budget to sustainable surplus. Cost-of-living pressures affect all South Australians. We have cut the ESL. We promised to do that. We campaigned on it and it is a policy of longstanding.

Over the four years ahead, we will be putting back $360 million into the pockets of South Australians. As the recipient, recently, of my ESL bill, like many South Australians I noticed immediately the effect of that change—a commitment that we have made good on. We are also moving to cap increases in levies, including the natural resources management levy from 1 July next year.

I am pleased and proud to see the significant investment we are making in health and education. Let there be no doubt about it: health and education, those portions of this state budget, occupy the lion's share of spending in our budget, and it is so important that we return to a situation in which we have confidence in the administration of health and education in this state. In health, we will spend more than $1.2 billion improving the health service. I am proud to say that more than $190 million will be spent on regional health to upgrade hospitals to address rural GP shortages and to extend rural chemotherapy services.

We are going to fulfil our election commitment to increase paediatric services at Mount Barker hospital by providing $79,000 per year, indexed, from this year. This is all about improving regional health services in the Adelaide Hills. We have committed more than $8.5 million to be spent over three years on the construction of a new aged-care facility at Strathalbyn and for the future fit-out of the Kalimna Hostel.

I am pleased to acknowledge that an additional $3.9 million has been committed, the result of the excellent work of Georgina Downer during the recent by-election campaign and the result of teamwork between the state and federal governments, to ensure that that very meritorious investment will be done right, will be done fully and will be set on the course for completion over the coming years. I am proud to say that the business case is underway on the process to determine how the $1.1 million investment we have set aside specifically for Kalimna ought be used for the purpose of refitting the site for aged-care accommodation or other purposes the community may decide.

I want to talk about our commitment to aged care at Strathalbyn because it exemplifies so much of what is at the heart of this new Marshall Liberal government. It exemplifies what is at the heart of so much of what I am proud about as a new member in this place and the way that we intend to go about governing in this state. Not only is it just one of the Marshall Liberal government's making good on an election commitment but, moreover, it is an indication that we are committed to ensuring that as a state we benefit, we grow, we thrive and we succeed as a whole state, not just as a city-state. Regional South Australia, and all of South Australia, is part of what we are investing in as a government to ensure that we succeed as a state.

Delighted as the people of Strathalbyn were at the commitment that was made in the course of the election campaign—effectively, the result of a year's work—on building a case, on setting out the evidence as to why it was necessary, on understanding the degree of neglect in regional health services that had preceded the making of that commitment, they often told me that they doubted that this could be done because it was such a large commitment. Over the last 16 years, the people of Strathalbyn had almost forgotten what it is like to have a government that is committed to them as much as a first priority as to anyone else in the state.

In the context of the state's health budget of more than $4 billion, our commitment to Strathalbyn is certainly affordable, responsible and evidence based, but what it represents in a larger way is a turnaround in approach. It is a turnaround in approach that is about responding to, supporting and investing in community and strengthening community throughout the state. This is a commitment of which I am particularly proud. I will keep working to ensure that our Hills, along with all the regions in South Australia, are central to our state's recovery under the new Marshall Liberal government.

In education, I am very proud that $692 million has been allocated to upgrade and modernise school infrastructure. I have already had the opportunity to visit several of the more than 20 schools located in Heysen together with the new Minister for Education. It is obvious in the regional Hills that this commitment will be well allocated where it is needed in regions that have been neglected for far too long. There will be a further increase of $515 million in education spending, so it is great news for Heysen, and I commend those budget measures.

The new government is delivering on our GlobeLink vision; $20 million has been allocated in the budget for the GlobeLink master plan. As we know on this side, the state is dependent upon exports and we need to ensure that our export industries are thriving and able to deliver our first class produce to the world. GlobeLink will ensure that there is a much-needed revolution in our rail/road freight network. It will create efficiencies and it will deliver freight to the rest of the country and around the world.

We are investing significantly in our regions in this budget. Regional communities, including those in Heysen, will benefit from $773 million over five years, tackling issues such as mobile blackspots, CFS station upgrades and the built infrastructure, services and facilities that regional South Australia needs in order to produce at its best. The amount of $5 million has been specifically allocated to upgrade CFS stations over the next two years. As we approach the fire season this year, and as a member with many CFS brigades throughout the Hills, I know that that investment will be readily and well deployed.

Planning, transport and infrastructure are at the centre of our investments throughout the state. I am proud to say that $470,000 has been allocated in 2018-19, and $480,000 a year thereafter to establish a Service SA centre at Mount Barker—again, a rational approach to the delivery of services throughout our state. It will ensure access to services for those in the Adelaide Hills community and for a town that has experienced rapid growth but to date is without the services support that should have been provided over that time to go with it.

Volunteers at the grassroots level and volunteers involved in community initiatives are at the centre of all that we wish to encourage and support. In the short time available to me, I wish to further highlight that many small regional communities throughout Heysen rely very much on the volunteer efforts that are provided by those in the communities, whether it be in sporting clubs or community groups. We are abolishing volunteer screening check fees for South Australians and that recognises the importance of that contribution.

Grassroots community sports clubs will continue to enjoy financial support. There will be an ongoing focus on female and family-friendly infrastructure, with $7.7 million, including $3.1 million from the Female Facilities Program and the Sporting Surfaces Program allocated. In particular, I am proud to see that the Bridgewater Oval will receive $50,000 for lighting upgrades. Again, that is a very practical measure that will ensure that all in the community can get much better use from that very beautiful facility. I look forward to continuing to work with all clubs throughout Heysen in securing future financial support.

There are further commitments, community-based commitments, through the budget. I single out our $10,000 commitment to the Macclesfield community, again to ensure that we are building a strong local community and looking for every opportunity to do so. We are committed to the environment and recreation. I am pleased to see that that will include the unlocking of the Mount Bold Reservoir for recreational use and for all the wonderful pursuits that may be allowed through that opportunity. I welcome the fact that the budget achieves a return to surplus and projects further surpluses across the forward estimates. It is a strong budget and it will secure the future for South Australia.

Ms STINSON (Badcoe) (21:24): I have read a few press releases in my time, and sometimes they do, of course, overdo it a touch, much like a newspaper headline, desperately trying to draw in some busy readers and get their attention. There is sometimes a bit of gilding the lily, a bit of sexing things up that goes on. But possibly the most—

The Hon. D.G. Pisoni: Like those outrageous comments you made about the member for Adelaide—it will cost you a lot of money.

Ms STINSON: We'll see about that, won't we? But possibly the most galling title I have seen on a government press release was on budget day, and it was this one from the Minister for Child Protection, which states, 'State government makes child protection a priority'. I know that that is what we have been long promised by the Liberals; in fact, it was quite a mantra of the last election campaign, so one would have thought that that rhetoric would have been matched with some new initiatives, some investment or maybe even a vision and a plan—

The Hon. R. Sanderson: Foster care to age 21.

Ms STINSON: And a plan—

The Hon. R. Sanderson: Audit of children, broadening of the qualifications.

Ms STINSON: I'm getting there—you just hang on a second there.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. R. Sanderson interjecting:

Ms STINSON: Hang on; I am happy to have a good read through it and explain to you what is going on.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Badcoe will continue and not respond to interjections.

The Hon. R. Sanderson interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Badcoe will be heard in silence.

Ms STINSON: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. So one would have thought there would be some initiatives or some new ideas. We have heard a lot of ideas from that side of the chamber over the last four years—here's the opportunity to actually do it. We might see some investment, we might see a vision or a plan for child protection.

The budget is, of course, a statement of the government's priorities. But, sadly, it seems that child protection really is not a priority at all. Yes, there is money for extending payments to foster carers for children in their care up to the age of 21. I have said here and I have said at many public events, which the minister and I have enjoyed going to together, that that is a great thing and I absolutely commend the government for that.

The government's headline figure in this budget was that there was $30.9 million in extra funds going to kids in care. You would think, 'Wow, that will be great for kids in the future.' Well, no, the vast majority of that has been shoved back into last year's budget, no doubt in an attempt to make the previous government's books look bad. There is only $7.2 million going in this financial year, and no extra funds in the years after that as extra child protection money.

What has been a priority is cutting this so-called priority area: $3.9 million for new residential care facilities axed. Of course we do not want to see more and more kids in care, especially in residential care, but I bet that the numbers of children in care have not gone backwards under this minister—

The Hon. R. Sanderson interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Adelaide!

Ms STINSON: —in the last six months. I bet that they have not gone backwards in the last six months, but it would be really hard to know this because this new minister is not even updating monthly the numbers of children in care, as the previous government did. For a government that talks about openness and transparency, it is pretty amazing that it gets to June and then this minister just decides that she is not going to update the figures each month, as everyone else has for quite some years.

She has not updated the website, which used to be updated monthly, since June. But something tells me that, if the number of kids in care were falling, we would definitely know about it.

The Hon. R. Sanderson: They're falling.

Ms STINSON: Well, maybe you should put it on the website. Maybe you should account for that openness and that transparency that your government goes on and on about, and maybe you can put them on your website so that everyone can see what is going on. But you are not, and I think that speaks a huge volume.

At June this year, there were 3,672 children in some form of care. We all support moves that will reduce the number of children in care, as long as of course they are being well cared for in their families instead or are not in need of state protection, but with no articulated plan to reduce the number of children in care, or boost the number of foster carers or increase the number of kinship placements, on top of what Labor was already doing, and with the legislation that Labor already championed, it is hard to see why the decision was taken to axe new residential care facilities and 12 full-time equivalents in residential care roles.

Surely, it would be sensible to reduce the number of children in care who need accommodation before axing the accommodation. This whole thing just smacks of an accounting exercise, and it does not seem that properly housing children in need of state protection is a priority at all, certainly not when you are taking money out of child protection accommodation.

Next, we have the slashing of 59 full-time equivalent positions that make up the financial counselling service within the Department for Child Protection. It is a complete shame. These staff work both on the prevention end and on the crisis end. They do preventative work with vulnerable families who have come into contact with the Department for Child Protection to try to make sure they can get on top of their finances and that they can be good parents and good families and capably look after their kids.

These guys are essentially the canary in the coalmine. They are the ones who, when they go in and provide people with the financial help they need, often observe other things and they report that back to the department, because they are part of the department. They can inform other people working in the department about what a family needs and if they are in a crisis situation. They are really raising these red flags every time they are interacting with vulnerable clients.

Aside from that, they are also working with children who are leaving care, helping them learn how to budget, how to survive in the community, how to manage their limited funds and to get on in the world. That is a really important thing. Without that, a lot of young people would find it a lot more difficult to make new lives for themselves outside of state care.

This service is getting outsourced. Of course, we know that Liberal governments love a bit of outsourcing and love a bit of privatisation, but this certainly is not the service that you want to outsource. The budget allocation for that new service is a paltry $10 million. That is probably 10 counsellors, if you are lucky. Ten people are now going to do the work that 59 full-time equivalents used to do. It is absolutely ridiculous to think that the standard of service and the quality of care given to these families in providing financial services are going to be anything like 59 workers can do.

So much for that other slogan of 'Better services'—not for people who are trying to get their families together under financial strain and not for children who are leaving care. There will be no better services for them. As for 'more jobs', try telling that to the 60-odd financial counsellors who will now be joining the dole queue. It is another hollow slogan that is not actually carried out in the numbers in the budget papers.

There has been scant detail about how the government plans to achieve these savings while also delivering quality financial assistance to people in need. There seems to be very little, if any, planning at all as to how this outsourcing is going to work, how it is going to operate and how it is going to deliver services to people. There seems to be this idea, a thread running through the child protection budget papers, that in this financial year the number of children in care will dramatically drop, that these cuts can be made because—hallelujah—the Liberals have fixed the pressures in child protection in just a few months. It is amazing! But, of course, that is simply and obviously ridiculous.

Considering that there have been no major reforms by the new Liberal government in the last six months, it is hard to see how massive reductions in the number of kids in care and massive increases in the number of foster carers are going to be achieved in this financial year. And there is no significant change to staffing levels. It is an amazing amount that will be achieved, which means that we do not need this other spending. It is just completely baseless. Certainly, we have not seen any sort of data that accords with the cuts that are actually being implemented here.

Do you know what there is room for in the budget? There is room for fitting out the department's offices to the tune of $6.4 million, and there is a whopping $1.6 million to fund setting up the stand-alone ministry. Then there is $2.2 million each year after that to fund ministerial staff. That is what the real priorities are for this Liberal government: not for somewhere for vulnerable children to rest their heads, not money for the people who care for them, not more staff or better recompensed staff, but nice offices for the minister and her staff to work in. It is an absolute joke. This shows exactly how much priority this new government actually puts on child protection.

My other shadow portfolio is arts. It is fair to say that the arts community is simply shocked at the severe budget cuts inflicted on it by this government. We have always known that the Liberals are no friends of the arts community, but this is a new low. There are total cuts over four years of $16.5 million. Arts SA has been slashed. They will be down to as few as eight to 10 staff the sector has been told this week. That is a huge reduction from the 98-odd staff who were budgeted for in the last financial year. It is 98-odd staff down to eight to 10, they are being told. There will be only eight to 10 staff left in Arts SA.

We all know, of course, that the executive director was sacked. He was not needed anymore. In fact, his whole role was removed, so it is leaderless at the moment. Parts of the arts portfolio have been picked off and sent to other portfolios like education and industry and skills. The children's theatre bodies that have been sent over to education were barely even told before the budget was released. There was not a skerrick of consultation. It is a divide and conquer approach to the arts.

I know that the arts sector asked for a whole-of-government approach, but this is not what they meant. Cutting it up and throwing chunks of it to different ministers is not a whole-of-government approach: it is the dismantling of the arts sector, and it is no secret. The arts sector know it. They know what is happening, they are not happy about it, and I think you have to watch this space. It is not a good outcome at all.

Many in the arts thought it was excellent when Premier Steven Marshall claimed the arts portfolio. They thought that maybe it would bring some esteem to their area of industry. They thought that it might even bring them some protection from severe budget cuts and it might bring them some extra respect, that government might actually respect what they do. They are jobs generators, but they are also building the fabric of our society.

What would we be without the cultural pursuits that we are lucky enough to have in Adelaide? There is a massive range of them. We like to call ourselves the festival state and claim that as part of our identity as a state, and so we should. Unfortunately, the arts sector certainly does not think that Steven Marshall is a champion of theirs now.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Point of order, sir.

Ms STINSON: The Premier has been refusing to meet with major and minor arts organisations since his—

The SPEAKER: A point of order by the Minister for Industry.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Previous speakers have insisted that members are addressed by their title, not by their name.

The SPEAKER: Yes, that is the case. The Minister for Industry is correct in this instance. I ask the member for Badcoe to please refer to members by their title or their electorate name.

Ms STINSON: Sure. Certainly, the arts sector does not think that the Premier is their champion now. The Premier has been refusing to meet with both major and minor arts organisations since his election. You could say, 'Look, he is a busy bloke.' Obviously, the Premier's gig is the busiest one in the state. Of course, he has quite a lot of portfolios. He probably would not have time to meet them or at least not all of them. It is a big role and we all accept that, but now we know, looking at the budget, that he just did not want to face the music. He knew that he was going to hack into the arts budget, or at least that Rob Lucas was going to do it. Who knows how much sway the Premier actually has over the Treasurer?

He could not face the people in the arts sector to tell them that. He could not face them and say, 'Look, unfortunately, we are going to cut your budgets.' He could not sit in a room with them and do that; therefore, he just did not meet them at all. The Liberal government promised a vision for the arts, but this is simply short-sighted. Here is an idea about coming up with an arts plan: maybe come up with a plan first and then decide what funding is needed. That is the sensible way to go about things: figure out what you are going to do, then figure out how much money it is going to cost, not the other way around.

At the end of the day, what this government's budget shows is that they just say anything during the election. They made all sorts of lofty promises but then, in government, they knew they were not going to carry those things out. The crumbs that have been given to the arts are massively overshadowed by the damage to be wrought by the cuts it is dishing out. Budgets are a statement of a government's priorities and, unfortunately, like child protection, the arts are simply not a priority.

Mr BASHAM (Finniss) (21:38): I rise to commend the Appropriation Bill 2018. In particular, I would like to talk about some of the fantastic announcements of funding in the seat of Finniss. The largest commitment of funding in Finniss is $940,000 in the 2018-19 financial year towards the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Torrens and Crozier roads. For those who might know Victor Harbor, that is the corner where the CWA, the Salvation Army, Veg Out and Woolworths converge. It is a very busy intersection, and at the moment it is very difficult to get out of Crozier Road from either side onto Torrens Street, particularly during the busy tourist times of the year.

This work is something that the City of Victor Harbor has been trying to get funded and put in place for over 10 years. They are very grateful that the Marshall government has decided to fund this project going forward, and they are currently working on the design. I met with the CEO of the council last week to discuss the project. They are quite excited and are now working with the department to work out the best time to start work, to make sure that there is limited impact on businesses and the community. The council is looking to do a major upgrade in Ocean Street sometime in the same period of time, over the next 12 months, and we need to make sure that these two works do not occur at the same time; otherwise, it will cause gridlock in the town.

Another of the commitments that has been honoured in Finniss is $300,000 towards the creation of a recreational park in Mount Compass. This wonderful community, which I have been part of for over 40 years, is made up of volunteers and fundraisers who do things for themselves. It is probably one of the rare communities where they own all their own sporting facilities as a community, rather than the council. They have gone out, invested and borrowed at different times to increase their facilities. They built a second oval about 15 or 20 years ago. They have made those commitments themselves.

Over the 40-odd years and many years before, there has been very little input from government or from council to these facilities. It is a great thing for the community to have this sort of money being put forward, along with nearly $400,000 from the Alexandrina Council to construct the new playground, which will benefit not only those living in the town and in the community but also tourists, etc. travelling down to the south coast, who can stop and have their lunch, go to the playground and have a rest and enjoy the community of Mount Compass. It is certainly going to be a wonderful thing for the community.

Another part of the investment made in Finniss was a small donation of $45,000 towards the Whalers Peninsula Community Association. This is a wonderful charity that exists in Goolwa and also has some emporium shops in Victor Harbor. They fund themselves to deliver housing to the homeless and also to assist domestic violence victims. They go out of their way to help those less fortunate than themselves in the community.

They were in difficult circumstances, particularly after a very large water bill for what was suspected to be a leak, but they were never able to identify it. This has enabled them to get back on their feet and work with the people who need assistance, accommodation and education, distributing food and doing drug rehabilitation work.

There have also been additional benefits to Finniss. They were the ones made as election commitments, but there are others that have also benefited Finniss. We are looking at the drones for the Port Elliot and Chiton Rocks surf lifesaving clubs. We have also seen in round 45 of the Active Clubs Grants in Finniss that $30,000 has been given to the Victor Harbor RSL and Football Club, $25,000 to the Port Elliot Tennis Club, $17,000 to Back Valley Tennis Club and $5,000 to the Southern Breakers Soccer Club. These are great commitments to the community and it is a credit to those organisations to go through and see the improvements that we will see from this sort of investment.

Budget highlights include $773 million worth of investment in regional South Australia, $11.3 billion for infrastructure, $1.2 billion in health and a $515 million boost for education. Another important part of the budget is the funding that has been made available to set up the South Australian productivity commission and Infrastructure SA. This is particularly important for a seat like Finniss, which is looking at different projects that may need to be done for the long-term future of the community.

One thing that comes to mind, that was raised at a meeting this morning when the minister for regions was down in Victor Harbor meeting with the community, was looking at the road from the Southern Expressway through to Willunga and then on to Victor Harbor. These are the sorts of infrastructure projects that we need to look at to see what sort of productivity gains we can get by investing in these spaces.

It is also really important that the Marshall government is committed to running an open and transparent government, keeping South Australians safer. There is $14.5 million provided in this budget for additional resources to support the operations of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption and to enable the ICAC to hold public hearings. This includes $7 million over four years for the ICAC and the Office for Public Integrity to support its operations with a further $7.5 million of investment expenditure over four years for IT system upgrades, office accommodation fit-out space currently used by the Ombudsman, and establishment of a public hearings facility.

I think one of the great investments is in education. The record funding for education is a hallmark of the Marshall Liberal government's first state budget. We are committed to delivering better services for South Australians and recognise the investment in our children and young people as a key driver for South Australia's prosperity well into the future. More than $1 billion is being invested in capital projects, including two brand-new birth to year 12 schools to be built under a private-public partnership model, and a new $100 million school in Whyalla funded by the state government.

The Marshall government is delivering on its education commitments by delivering a Literacy Guarantee package of measures including 13 new literacy coaches, phonics screening checks for all year 1 students and literacy and numeracy professional learning programs for teachers. A package of measures will address bullying, truancy, and substance abuse in our schools; providing for an expansion of Languages in Schools programs, increasing the focus on South Australian children learning a second language; and building a new technical college in Adelaide's western suburbs which specialises in preparing for South Australia's future defence needs. The government will ensure that the education department is efficiently structured to support schools and preschools while providing a much more targeted approach to assisting leaders and teachers with professional development.

Another key space is tourism, particularly for the area of Finniss. We are committed to growing event tourism in South Australia. The government is investing an extra $21.5 million over four years to the events bid fund to secure more lucrative major events. We are progressing investigations into the Great Southern Bike Trail by investing $100,000 to commission a feasibility study for a cycling trail from Adelaide to Melbourne. The minister has even approached me with the possibility of hopping on a bike and riding through the section where the bike track will go through Finniss—

The Hon. L.W.K. Bignell: That's cruelty to bikes.

Mr BASHAM: That is cruelty to bikes, maybe. His thoughts are that if two middle-aged, overweight men can ride pushbikes, then anyone can. I think it is a challenge I will take up if he wishes to do that. The sum of $4.9 million has been provided to support the hosting of major events in South Australia, in addition to the increased funding provided for the major events fund, including the NRL's State of Origin in 2020 and five national swimming events through Swimming Australia.

Trade and investment are also very important, particularly to the agriculture sector of South Australia, and we are helping our exporters to grow by investing $12.7 million over four years in new trade offices. The five new trade offices will be established to grow South Australia's international trade and support our exporters in accessing markets. This is a great space that we need to invest in. In the dairy industry I have seen firsthand how much better you do when you have people in the country actually helping with projects.

Another key space where the Marshall Liberal government is investing is regional health. Regional health outcomes need to be improved for those living outside the metropolitan area. The Marshall Liberal government has deep connections and commitments to regional South Australians and their ability to access quality health care and services closer to home. Health funding initiatives for regional South Australia contained in the budget include:

$140 million over 10 years for country health capital works to significantly improve our regional hospitals and health infrastructure, which has denigrated following 16 years of Labor Party neglect;

$20 million over four years to develop and implement a rural workforce strategy to address the shortage of health practitioners in regional areas;

$6.9 million over four years to deliver additional chemotherapy services in regional areas, allowing patients to receive lifesaving treatment closer to home;

A further $5 million for the implementation of a single statewide chemotherapy prescribing system to reduce the risk of an underdosing fiasco that we saw under the former Labor government; and

$1 million over four years for the South Australian Healthy Towns Challenge to enable rural and regional communities to apply for a grant of up to $50,000 to help improve the health and wellbeing of their communities.

It is also really important that we see the introduction of the six new boards in country South Australia. There is $3.6 million annually funding those boards to allow for decisions to be made closer to the people who are receiving the care.

Another really important space, and certainly something I am quite passionate about, is making sure that we have reliable, low-cost power for South Australians. The one thing I really want to see is the interconnector going into New South Wales. That would have saved the problem that we suffered back in 2016. On my dairy farm, we have only missed three milkings in the 42 years that we have been on that farm, and all were in 2016 due to power outages. Unfortunately, those costs are incurred by dairy farmers.

I am one of those who has not invested in a generator on my farm, but many have. What is really concerning me about where the power situation is currently is that the dairy industry is actually advising that during the peak periods of power use over the summer, and particularly the afternoon milking, if farmers have smart meters on their farms, economically they would be much better off running their generator rather than using the mains power to run their dairies. It seems counterintuitive that we should be using backup generators to run our businesses.

What is important to me is the investment that we are seeing in the primary industries and regional development space. It is really important that the budget is investing in growing South Australia's primary industries. The commitment to installing new quarantine bins for disposal of fruit to strengthen the defences against fruit fly and the boosting of staff resources at PIRSA Biosecurity are also important parts and something I have been involved in in my roles in the dairy industry to understand the risks that we face from incursion, and the effects it could have on our industry are immense. We need to make sure that we have the resources to try to stop the incursions in the first place, but also to respond if they do occur.

I also think it is really important that we have seen an additional $260,000 of funds go into Rural Business Support to help them with financial counselling services through to June 2020—helping farmers manage their books and fill out applications for assistance programs—particularly in view of the fact of the dry conditions that we are facing in some of our regional areas at the moment.

We are also seeing an investment in a strong future with the primary production industries by maintaining the workforce commitment at the South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI). The government is supporting South Australia's vibrant food manufacturing sector, providing $1 million to support Food SA. All these things are there to help our primary industries.

In the regional development space, it is also really important that we note the $10 million investment we are making into the Mobile Black Spot Program to improve mobile access to our regional communities. We are also seeing investment in regional roads and other infrastructure through the Royalties for Regions program. We are seeing the securing of funds for South Australian Regional Development Australia boards through providing $12 million over four years to encourage strong and effective rural leadership.

This area of the rural regions has been neglected and underinvested over the past 16 years, and I am pleased to see the commitment not only in funds but also in the fact that we are seeing ministerial visits in the regions. I am really pleased to have had seven ministerial visits in the last six months, and another two in the next few weeks, coming into my region and talking to my community—having one-on-one or group sessions with community members to hear their concerns. It will take time to clean up the mess and turn it around from the 16 years of neglect, but we are delivering on our election commitments, and the budget is back on track for the regions.

Another key thing that we see in the budget is the investment in the CFS space for the regions. We are seeing the establishment of new CFS aircraft based up in the Mid North, and we are also seeing a significant increase in the number of firefighting aircraft to support ground-based volunteers. We have gone from 18 to 26 aircraft. We are also seeing $5 million going towards upgrading CFS stations over the next two years.

Something that I think is really important is the money we are putting towards getting the Alert SA app back up and running. This is something that I have personally missed—being able to be away from my farm yet understanding what is happening nearby. Not having that available to me makes it very difficult to understand how my business is operating under threat of fire. Only last summer we had a fire only four kilometres away. I was home at the time but happened to be inside. We were directly downwind from it, and we did not know for half an hour. That half an hour could have been crucial. Luckily, this time it was not. I think this is a great investment and I think this is a great budget.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (21:58): I would like to provide some observations on the state budget. I say 'observations' because I think the state budget is a bit like beauty: it is in the eyes of the beholder. People can see the same document in quite clearly different ways, and that reflects our personal values. The budget is more than an economic statement. The budget is a reflection of the values of the government of the day. Throughout this budget process, we have heard ad nauseam that tough decisions had to be made for a whole range of reasons.

My concern is that such commentary just masks the fact that, in my opinion, this budget lacks any moral foundation. How tough is it to rip an additional $2,500 in rent from poor people living in the most basic housing while giving those who own $5 million-plus in property a tax cut of up to $3,500? That is not a tough decision. That, in my opinion, is an immoral decision.

This budget not only lacks a moral foundation but, when you look at it in detail, it also lacks a sound economic foundation. I will try a quick analysis of what I think are some of the key issues. In this budget revenue is at an all-time high. Revenues are expected to rise by $1.8 billion over four years. The driver for this revenue increase is predominantly an increase in the GST revenue, which is expected to rise by $1 billion over four years. Budget surpluses are estimated at $48 million and $105 million in 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively.

When looked at in detail, these surpluses are propped up by extra dividends from government businesses, mainly from SA Water. Despite this increase in revenue over the forward estimates, the budget position worsens overall. Expenditure is up, and that is to fund a whole range of election commitments, most of them unfunded. That probably explains why budget debt is going up. Debt is up: general government sector net debt is expected to rise by $3.3 billion over the next four years.

When you look at the debt ratios, you see that they paint an even darker picture. Debt to revenue ratio increases from 27 per cent to 41 per cent over four years and, despite nearly 40 consecutive months of jobs growth, employment growth will go down from 2.1 per cent in 2017-18 to 1 per cent in 2019-20. State final demand growth drops from 3.3 per cent in 2017-18 to 3 per cent and then 2.5 per cent. So we are going to have a worsening budget position and less employment, despite what we have been told. This is from the budget papers. These are not my figures but the figures that appear in the budget papers.

Then there are a number of cuts, closures and privatisations in this budget. There are cuts to police, health, corrections, primary industries and tourism and to 29 job creation programs, which I will talk about a bit more. Closures include Service SA centres, seven TAFE campuses and bus and train services. It is interesting, as government members try to defend some of these cuts, to hear the language that has been used.

When you look at the Service SA centres, the response by the government has shown clear indifference to the plight of some people in our community, those who for whatever reason cannot access the internet, whether they lack the skills to do so or lack the financial resources. It makes the divide between those in our community even greater, particularly affecting older people, who rely on that face-to-face contact at Service SA centres.

I refer to the closure of TAFE. I was in Wudinna only a few weeks ago, and I can tell you that the people in regional South Australia were not happy about the cuts and the proposed closure of the Wudinna TAFE. They were also not happy about some of the proposed cuts to health on their peninsula. In fact, the chair of the Eyre Peninsula health advisory council—I think it is Eyre west—actually resigned in protest at this new government's indifference to health care on Eyre Peninsula.

There are cost increases, like the ones I mentioned to South Australian Housing Trust rents, liquor licensing fees, mining royalties, petrol station licences, real estate agent fees and agricultural research costs, yet despite that we still have an increase in debt in this state. As to the cuts to SA Pathology, its proposed privatisation, as I understand the budget, unless SA Pathology delivers up to $100 million in savings it will be put out to pasture.

I have two concerns about that. During this period of trying to make these savings SA Pathology will be required to reduce its service levels, which makes it ripe for the government to then sell off because it is reducing its service level. Importantly, selling off SA Pathology reduces the amount of competition in that market, and in the end lack of competition means that we will be paying more for pathology services. That means that all the government have done is shift the cost from their budget to the individual budgets of ordinary South Australians. It may also mean the difference between having the tests and not having the tests.

When you look at the economics of this budget, there will be less job growth over time, more debt over time and less growth over time. This is a budget that members of this government are proud of. In terms of jobs, which is very important particularly in the northern suburbs and Gawler, Job Accelerator grants have been cut—I understand that program created about 4,200 new jobs across the state and in my region—and $50 million in grants and $35 million in loans for businesses to expand and grow operations have also been cut.

The unemployment rate, which was at 5.7 per cent at the time that Holden closed, was expected to increase. However, because of the intervention of the previous Labor government, that did not occur. We helped the whole industry transition through a range of programs for individuals who were losing their jobs, and who had to find new jobs, and also for those businesses that had to re-engineer themselves into new markets.

The jobs creation program has been axed as a result of this budget, which includes the Future Jobs Fund, the Economic Investment Fund, the Unlocking Capital for Jobs fund, the Investment Attraction Advisory Board, the renewable energy technology fund, the Economic Development Board and the Small Business Development Fund. I know that small businesses in my area were very successful in getting grants that helped them grow. There was the Digital Game Development Program and, while I am no expert in this area, there were a number of young people in my community who would try to get funds through this program. The high technology of digital games is one of those industries of the future. The Automotive Supplier Diversification Program was also cut, and there were a whole range of other cuts as well.

What should also be highlighted in this budget is that the Marshall Liberal budget has abandoned a program that assisted manufacturers impacted by the closure of Holden's Elizabeth site. The Automotive Supplier Diversification Program, which was initiated by the Labor government, has been axed. That program was designed to support firms operating in the automotive supply chain to ensure a smooth transition due to the Holden closure. To date, it has been very successful. There have also been other cuts mentioned in this budget.

The Marshall Liberal government have cut more than $4 million in grants that helped fund the installation and maintenance of CCTV cameras across South Australia. Cuts also include $3.9 million in crime prevention grants, which helped to fund new CCTV cameras, and a further $229,000 from the Safe City grant scheme, which helped fund the maintenance of the city's CCTV network. They have also cut $38 million from SAPOL with no details on exactly where those cuts will be made. Given that SAPOL's bulk costs are in staff, how they are going to find $38 million without affecting staffing levels in police is beyond me. The government have also cut $960,000 from funding Crime Stoppers and all $190,000 in funding for a monitored taxi rank service.

The Marshall Liberal government's first budget is also imposing on South Australians an additional $87 million in fees, charges and rents. Over the next four years, hoteliers will pay $9.7 million in additional costs; real estate agents, $3.7 million; miners, $4.7 million; and industrial and waste operators, $6.1 million. They will all be hit with higher fees and costs by government regulators.

The Liberal government is also putting their hands in the pockets of the South Australian Research and Development Institute to the tune of $5.1 million. Firearms owners—and I would have thought that some of the country members might have highlighted this—will be hit with an additional cost of $1.75 million. There will be an additional $4 million for people paying court fees, and an additional $48.8 million for people in Housing Trust tenancies.

In addition, there is an extra $3 million this year from the natural resources management levy, which has been increased by 5 per cent, and there is a 15 per cent increase in the hard waste levy. That is interesting because the government made a promise not to cost shift to local government, yet they are doing exactly that, not only in this way—by increasing charges—but also through the sports program, where they have actually cut one of the programs and reinstituted part of the program with the balance of funding to be provided by local government. It is actually shifting the expenditure from the state government to local councils.

With the Housing Trust increases, there will be an increase of $50 over the next few years, which means that some tenants will be paying up to $50 more a week by 2021. About 3,000 low-income tenants who live in bedsits or one-bedroom cottage flats will actually be paying an extra $50 a week, or $2,500 a year, yet those people who own properties worth $5 million or more will be paying $3,500 less.

But it gets worse. While we are making sure that the cost of living for the poorest in our community is increased, what does the government do? It actually increases the new Housing Authority board chair's payment by $33,000, or up to $70,700 or $6,000 per board meeting. The increase will be $33,000 more than was paid to the former South Australian Housing Trust chair, who received $37,000.

Public schools will be hit through this budget by forcing many schools to reallocate funds that we provide for better facilities in those schools, to reinvest in those schools and to renovate those schools. We now have to shift some of that funding to building new classrooms for the shift of the year 7 group to those schools. The sad part is that we will have a whole range of primary schools that will have underutilised classes, yet we will have brand-new classes in other schools. The Building Better Schools program unfortunately has been cut by—

Dr Close: Has been raided.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: It has been raided, even though the government promised it would not do that. When it comes to schools, the free laptop program was a well-received decision by public schools in my area. The program makes sure that each child has an equal chance to get the best possible education. Again, it is a bit like the Service SA centre closing. You will have those who are technology rich and those who are technology poor, and this government is clearly determined to make sure that that gap gets bigger and bigger and those who are poor get poorer.

Regarding the Service SA closures, there was Modbury today and a few others. Given that the minister today has indicated that it is based on his spatial assessment, this spatial assessment, I am sure, will one day come to Gawler and he will close the Gawler Service SA centre. I have used that centre. Every time I use that centre I have to queue up as a lot of people use it.

It is interesting that it is said that it is somehow improving service delivery by cutting a service that is actually overwhelmingly used by people. In fact, there are 11 million transactions at Service SA every year. For some reason, the government believes that it is okay for people to travel 10, 15 or 20 kilometres to get to the next centre if they wish, but they probably will not because they will be cutting bus services as well. This government has said that not only are they going to cut the service but they are going to make you pay more to get to the next Service SA delivery point.

Regarding the cuts to PIRSA, they are cutting the South Australian Premium Food and Wine Credentials Grant Program by $6.6 million, the Economic Sustainability Grant Program by $10.6 million, the Food Innovation Taskforce and Advanced Food Manufacturing Grant Program by $8.8 million and the Food Park Tenant Attraction Program by $5.5 million.

The Food Park attraction program was designed to make sure that we attract the right sort of business to make the Food Park a very successful location and also to build on food manufacturing, which is, if you like, the manufacturing of the future in that area, particularly around the food bowl areas that go around my electorate.

However, it does not stop there. The government has also hit SARDI with $5 million in additional costs over the next four years during a time when the primary industries sector is in most need of support. As I mentioned earlier, there have been cuts to TAFE in Port Adelaide, Tea Tree Gully, Urrbrae, Parafield, Roxby Downs, Coober Pedy and Wudinna. For a lot of young people and other people, face-to-face contact is the only way people can actually learn. By insisting that you go online, or only go through online programs, effectively means that some people will not take up post secondary education. That was certainly the message I got in Wudinna when I was talking to people there, people who said their concern was that there would be fewer young people entering post secondary education because of the closure of the service centre.

It is interesting to note that this government does not like people being critical of it, and what is the best way to make sure there is no criticism of what it does? It is to cut funding to those not-for-profit organisations that require government funding to do their work. As a government, we introduced legislation to protect the independence of those not-for-profit organisations because we did not mind being critiqued as a government.

This government, despite saying it is going to improve accountability and transparency, actually punishes organisations by cutting their funds to make sure they cannot be critical of it. It is no accident that the Health Consumer Alliance has had its funding cut, because that is one area in which the government would be most vulnerable in the future. I would like to turn to some things a little closer to home, and issues in my electorate of Light.

Despite campaigning heavily on improvement to Curtis Road by the Liberal Party—particularly by their Liberal candidate, who actually made a video and put it on Facebook, saying that an incoming Liberal government would do the right thing by people in the Light electorate and improve Curtis Road—there was no money in the budget. In fact, when I asked a question about this a few weeks ago in this place the minister was unsure what I was talking about, and kept referring to other roads rather than to the intersections of Curtis and Stebonheath, Curtis and Coventry, and other roads in this area.

The new school has been mentioned, which is actually an existing commitment by the previous Labor government. In fact, two commitments in this budget for my electorate, big commitments, are essentially recycled Labor government commitments. They were the electrification to Gawler, which we had budgeted for and all we needed—

The Hon. R. Sanderson interjecting:

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: The member for Adelaide is not sure what she is talking about. Perhaps she should listen because she does not display much knowledge. Slogans are no substitute for understanding the issues before you.

The reality was that in the last state budget we made money available for the electrification; all we needed was the partnering with the federal government. They have now come on board. However, that said, the new special relationship the state Liberal government has with the federal government does not deliver everything the previous government would have delivered. For example, the electrification of the Gawler rail project does not include upgraded stations: the Gawler central station will be left in the condition it is in now, and it has not had any improvements for some years.

Not only that, the redevelopment of the Gawler Central station, the actual electrification work, will not take into account the possible extension of the line to Concordia when the Concordia development goes ahead. We are going to have this electrification and then in about five or 10 years' time we will have to dig it all up again because they are not actually doing the work required to do it properly this time—and I will remind this government of their decision.

It also does not involve any expansion of the car parks. Anybody who uses the stations in my electorate knows that by 9 o'clock all the car parks are full. It is great that people are using trains, it is great that people are parking there and using the park-and-ride, but the reality is that people are now starting to park in all the side streets. We also need investment in the car parks to make sure we have a viable public transport system.

There is also the road extension, the Gawler East Link Road project. Despite campaigning on extending Tiver Road it is not in the budget. The Gawler Health Service gets no extra money, and the Fund My Neighbourhood program, which is very popular in my community, has also been axed. Tourism has been cut by $11 million. In short, the north has been abandoned. For a party in government, it is a party that acts in opposition because it refuses to accept responsibility for its budget. We on this side will make sure, and the people in my electorate will make sure, they are held accountable for their budget.

The SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Light. The member for Torrens.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (22:19): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and congratulations on your recent marriage. I rise to make comment on the Appropriation Bill 2018, and in doing so I want to highlight some of what I think is so wrong with the state budget. It did not take long to read through to find the cuts, the closures and the privatisations.

Firstly, I want to raise the issue of the rise in rent for Housing SA tenants. Thousands of our low-income Housing Trust tenants are facing rent hikes of up to $50 per week. Some of these tenants are among the most vulnerable in our community, including pensioners and the elderly, and those who can least afford an increase in their rent. For many, it will be the difference between putting fresh food on the table and affording basic necessities. I have heard from a number of these residents in my electorate who are saying that it is causing them sleepless nights. They just cannot afford this increase.

The impact will be so significant in some cases that it will be the difference between a family being able to afford registration fees for their children to be able to play local sport, including netball and football, or to take calisthenics lessons, or to pay for school uniforms. Taking money from the most vulnerable members of our community just does not pass the fairness test. One must wonder what the Liberal members for King and Newland are telling their Housing SA residents, who would also be facing these same challenges.

The budget also reveals the privatising of vital health services, including SA Pathology, which South Australians rely on. We have already heard from the shadow minister that privatisation of SA Pathology will mean fewer clinicians, fewer labs and longer processing times, which experts tell us could lead to life-threatening delays. Privatisation also means higher out-of-pocket expenses for patients. We do not want a health system that puts profits before patients.

Before the election, the Liberal leader told the people of South Australia, 'We don't have a privatisation agenda.' Well, now we can see clearly that that was just another one of what has become a broken promise. Also hit by the Liberal agenda of privatisation is the ambulance transfer of patients from Modbury Hospital to the Lyell McEwin, and residents in the north-east are not happy about this.

A further area that has been hit that will impact on thousands of families is the announcement by the Liberal government to close three Service SA centres: Modbury, Prospect and Mitcham—all very busy centres. Two, in particular, that service the north-east, including the Torrens electorate, are the nearby Prospect and Modbury centres. I attended both these centres just over a week ago with the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Croydon, and the member for Wright. We met many locals who were quick to tell us what a bad decision it is by the government to close these centres. We could not hand over the pen quickly enough for them to sign the petition. Negative feedback about this decision has been overwhelming.

Most South Australians rely on Service SA centres to access essential services such as change of address for vehicle registration or driver's licences, renewing a driver's licence, replacing a licence, renewing a learner's permit, applying for a learner's permit, applying for a South Australian licence for overseas licence holders, transferring an interstate licence, ordering motor vehicle special plates and replacing motor vehicle plates, cancelling vehicle registration, and transferring vehicle registration. Then there is recreational boating licence registrations, and the list goes on.

Currently, some of these can only be done in person, while others are able to be done online or by phone. But there are so many in our community, particularly seniors, who have not been carried along with the digital revolution. They are not computer literate and many do not even own a computer. Also, using a credit card or a savings card to make an online payment is not a consideration for them. The impact on these members of our community will be significant if the government chooses to go ahead with the closures of the Service SA centres. I know that many residents in my electorate have already contacted us to see if they would be able to come in to our office and access an iPad so that we can help them through it. It is going to have a significant impact on those people.

We all know the waiting times at some Service SA centres are long enough already. Closures of the Modbury, Prospect and Mitcham centres will mean longer travel times, longer queues at the remaining centres and poorer services for everyday South Australians, and it just does not make sense. Before the election, those opposite did not say anything about closing Service SA centres, and I am yet to speak to anyone who thinks this is a good idea.

Also impacting on families in the north-east is the intended closure by the government of the Strathmont swimming pool. This pool is used extensively by around 1,500 children and adults for swimming lessons, including children with autism spectrum disorder, intellectual and physical disabilities; new migrants from landlocked states, often challenged by fear of water; young babies; and some more senior members of our community requiring the heated pool. I have received representation from providers and many families who access the pool on a weekly basis who are devastated by this notification, as are members of some of my school communities whose children access them in special needs classes.

I have in this place asked the minister and the Premier: what price is put on the quality of life of those who access the Strathmont pool—those with a disability, both young children and those more advanced in their years, also the new arrivals for whom learning to swim can be a challenge and ordeal, and the impact it will also have on surrounding hydrotherapy facilities and pools that are already at or near capacity by trying to make room for the soon to be displaced users?

It is a documented fact that we need more, not fewer, heated and hydrotherapy swimming pools for rehabilitation, for those with a disability who benefit through water therapy and those who form part of our ageing population to assist them in keeping mobile and in their homes. The benefit far outweighs the cost socially and economically. So, on behalf of the users of the Strathmont swimming pool and the nearby hydrotherapy pools that would be negatively impacted, I have asked the Marshall Liberal government to reconsider their decision to close the Strathmont swimming pool. We have a petition circulating in the community and many people have called into my office just to register their opposition to the closure.

The casualty list of this budget goes on. Another is the Klemzig O-Bahn interchange and the Tea Tree Plaza park-and-ride. Although budgeted for by Labor, they have been put on hold indefinitely. I know that my residents in Klemzig are particularly keen for these works to progress because their streets are congested throughout the working day with the cars of people who are parking there. The Labor government's commitment to increase the number of these car parks would have seen that congestion on the roads removed and provided appropriate parking for commuters.

Labor also committed to additional car parks at the Paradise park-and-ride, increasing the number of car parks by 350 spaces, as well as an upgrade to the intersection at Darley Road. The Golden Grove park-and-ride was also to benefit from additional car parks under Labor. For local residents, this budget fails to deliver on the solution to fix Fosters Road. It is a broken promise by the Liberals that was misleading from the beginning and that is how we called it in the lead-up to the March election. Labor's commitment to the upgrade of Fosters Road, which is a road that runs between Grand Junction Road and North East Road in the suburbs of Northgate, Oakden, Lightsview, Hillcrest and Greenacres, was significant.

With the major Lightsview development and older houses in some of the other areas being demolished and new houses being replaced on these blocks, it means we have a lot more traffic in the area, so Fosters Road has become particularly busy. It is an issue about which I have consulted widely with the community, including holding a very well-attended public meeting, following which the department delivered a draft management plan. The Labor government's $7.3 million costed commitment included road resurfacing; upgrades to signage and line marking; upgrading to pedestrian facilities, including new pedestrian refuges; improved lighting at the intersection; and, importantly, the installation of new signalised intersections at the North East Road-Fosters Road junction, including fully controlled right-hand turns from Fosters Road.

In comparison, the Liberal commitment was $1.3 million for lights at the North East Road and Fosters Road junction. The costing was way off the mark, but they still had election posters lining Fosters Road and North East Road saying they had the solution and that it would be fixed by the $1.3 million investment in traffic lights. It was never going to happen. The Liberal candidate for Torrens circulated DLs that said:

A Marshall Liberal government will improve safety for residents and commuters at the busy and dangerous intersection of Fosters Road and North East Road by providing $1.3 million to install traffic lights at this location.

We knew that this would never cover the fix for Fosters Road, and so did the Liberals, but they were prepared to tell residents that this is all it would take. Now, instead, we have some minor works taking place—just another broken promise. In addition, the promised traffic lights at the Dernancourt shopping centre, Lower North East Road junction, promised by the Liberals in the lead-up to the election, have failed to materialise in this budget.

Another consequence of this budget will be the impact on female change facilities. Tens of thousands of girls and women registered to play sport across our state and numbers playing traditionally male-dominated sports are rapidly growing. Through our South Australian Women in Sports Taskforce, the Labor government led the way on ensuring that girls and women are equal participants in all aspects of sport in South Australia, and we had significant momentum towards achieving gender equality in sport.

With the increase in participation by women and girls came the need for suitable facilities. In government, Labor recognised and responded to this increasing need and delivered opportunities across the state for local clubs to build such facilities, enabling grassroots sports to flourish. We boosted participation, providing more sports changing rooms for girls and women. This is because Labor believes that girls and women who play sport in South Australia should have access to the same level of facilities as boys and men.

Recent years have seen great progress, with women and girls playing Aussie Rules at a local, state and national level. Australian Rules football is a name synonymous with Australian culture and our national identity. It is men who have traditionally played the sport that so many women and men hold dear, the sport that rules and divides our workplaces and our lounge rooms nationally. At the Gaza Sports and Community Club in Klemzig, the Gaza Women's football team, only in its second year, fought their way to the top of the ladder taking out the holy grail, the premiership, last year and were runners-up this year. The number of women on the players list has grown considerably, with the vision of adding another women's football team.

At the junior level, Gaza currently has two girls' teams in the competition and the club is also exploring a women's cricket team and a girls' Twenty20 cricket team. Having female change rooms and other facilities at our sporting clubs sends a very important message to women and girls that they are welcome in the sport and that their club's culture is one that will facilitate their participation.

Labor made an election commitment of $500,000 towards female change facilities at the Gaza Sports and Community Club for the women and girls. The Liberal candidate for Torrens met with Gaza's committee and made a commitment that a Liberal government would match Labor's commitment for women's change facilities, and some months back committee members signed a statutory declaration to this effect.

Along with the Gaza club members, I am still waiting for the minister to respond to my question, asked in question time, about when that commitment will be honoured. They have been silent on this promise made by their candidate in the lead-up to the March election. This type of investment in women's sporting success will pay dividends for our South Australian community into the future, setting young girls and women up for sporting success, and I look forward to getting a positive response back from the minister.

The cuts and privatisation in this budget add up to a real threat to community safety. It is not what we were promised by the government in the lead-up to the election. It is not the promise of 'a strong police presence', which includes a physical shopfront open beyond daytime hours. The government has found itself in a corner by promising something that the police never wanted and they say we do not need, so when you get to the bottom of it, what does it deliver? Police stations are mostly staffed by civilian staff who do not have any authority or training in front-line policing.

Still on community safety funding, Crime Stoppers has been cut, putting this valuable crime fighting resource at real risk. In January this year, the Labor government committed $960,000 from the Attorney-General's Department to ensure Crime Stoppers continued to provide their valuable service to South Australia. Why those opposite have chosen not to honour this commitment and secure funding for this vital crime-fighting service is puzzling.

This means that South Australia is the only state not to provide government funding for Crime Stoppers. Over the past two decades, Crime Stoppers has helped solved almost 30,000 crimes, including some of South Australia's most heinous cases. What does this do for the public safety of South Australians?

Crime Stoppers is an important link between the public and the police, providing our law enforcement officers with invaluable information about all sorts of serious crime. It does not make sense. We have a government that claims it is waging a war on drugs yet cutting funding for a program that does so much towards detecting drugs in our community.

Every day people in our state will be hurt by these cuts, closures and privatisations that form such a significant part of this budget: Klemzig residents will see their streets blocked by O-Bahn commuters who cannot find a car park at the park-and-ride; 1,500 users of the Strathmont swimming pool, including children with special needs, will be displaced; residents in Torrens and surrounding areas will not get the promised solution to the Fosters Road-North East Road intersection; and public schools are now discovering that previously planned projects from the Building Better Schools programs have been cut.

Up to 44 secondary schools and 18 birth to year 12 schools are waiting to see if their planned projects are affected. Some have been told that money is being diverted to pay for the Liberal Party's promise of moving students to year 7. We need to be investing in our schools: instead, the Liberals are cutting much needed projects.

TAFE students are being impacted. This is the worst possible time to be closing TAFE campuses. In places like Port Adelaide, we are on the cusp of a jobs boom, with billions of dollars worth of defence contracts. At a time when we should be expanding, investing in training and jobs for our young people, those opposite are closing TAFEs and cutting job opportunities for South Australians. Impacting on those in the north-east and in my electorate is the closure of the Tea Tree Gully TAFE.

The cuts go on and on and on, with the cutting of 4,000 public servants and the announcement that bus services, with routes in the north, south, east and west, are on the government's hit list to be cut. This will impact on commuters who rely on public transport for their everyday lives. Before the election, the Liberals did not say anything about cutting these bus services. The cuts continue, with the loss of 30 job creation, transition and support services, and the closure of a further five TAFE campuses. We might well ask why.

The Liberal government inherited a growing economy, a budget in surplus and a falling unemployment rate. Now, in their first budget, they have plunged the budget into deficit, increased debt and unleashed cuts, closures and privatisations that will impact on our communities. We need to be investing in jobs, not cutting training and jobs. One must ask why closures and privatisations are occurring, with the government set to receive an extra $1 billion in GST.

When we see the impact of the budget on our local communities it proves what so many South Australians already knew in the lead-up to the election and what others have now come to realise: that the Liberal slogan, 'We're going to govern for all South Australians,' is just that—it is a slogan, it is empty words and it is hollow promises.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (22:38): The first budget of the Marshall government has been handed down and, as this is the first time I will speak on a budget as an Independent and grandmother of the house, I find myself able to say a little more a little differently than I may have done in the past.

Like all budgets, it contains good news and bad news. The populist phrases of 'more jobs, lower costs and better services' is only part of the story of this budget and, as with all budgets, the politics of this budget, the bad news, has taken a little while to trickle out into reality and the consciousness of those it will affect: the electors of South Australia.

There is a real difference between democracy and politics. Democracy is not easily explained these days, especially when people see federal leaders they have voted for being regularly rotated between election cycles and topics like the participation of women in parliament becoming such a damaging and damning indictment of those trying to make a contribution at the highest end of our participatory democracy.

I believe candidate selection is one of the most important parts of any democratic system and hope it never relies on the wealth of a person or the number of promises that a candidate has had to make. Like diversity and dissent, candidate selection is an integral part of democracy where politics often has undue influence.

Politics is the activity and action used to gain and hold power and influence. Politics has a hand in every decision of every person and every committee—and parliament is, after all, the mother of all committees. It means decisions are not always made for the right reasons but by weighing up the pros and cons, and there is politics in every decision and every promise and every reprioritisation.

It is admirable to want to keep promises, especially election promises, as a first step in restoring trust in both the political system that runs our democracy and us, the elected representatives of the people of this state. Election promises are the impetus for decision-making on polling day. It is important to keep promises, but it is more important not to make them if you have your fingers crossed behind your back.

State campaigns come every four years. They have become marketing cycles—duels with glossy brochures snuggly positioned under arms at 60 paces. The underlying problem, though, is people no longer believe much of what is said anymore, especially in campaigns. There are good reasons for this. The old 'we have inherited a mess' carries some weight but does not really wash anymore. What could often be decoded from this line and what should be really said is, 'We have other priorities.'

People feel betrayed when they are ambushed by a loss of services not mentioned in campaigns. The further betrayal of finding that promises they heard matched in a campaign are being 'reprioritised' along electorate lines makes it much harder to regain trust. We need to be honest. As the famous line goes in the movie which this evening we shall call 'A Few Good Marines', we can handle the truth.

I want to take a look at a few issues in the budget that will hit close to home for the electors of Florey. Re-establishing the role of Modbury Hospital became a non-negotiable issue for me and the people of the north-east. As part of the suite of the now discredited measures in the Transforming Health initiative, we saw Modbury Hospital brought to its knees again. The hardworking health professionals and hospital volunteers continue to do all they can to provide good services to the residents of the north-east but, like the rest of us, they are getting a little tired of waiting to see the promises kept.

When will the money earmarked for an extended stay area in the emergency department be spent and the work finally begin on this much-needed and long-promised service? When will Modbury be properly resourced to allow the return of level 1 intensive care, allowing additional services to be performed and removing the pressure from emergency staff currently called upon to provide a service of sorts upstairs while leaving the patients downstairs to fend for themselves?

When will money be spent on infrastructure outside, where bricks on the facade of the building are falling off and, more importantly, inside where palliative care waits for much-needed upgrade? That is not to mention a much-needed upgrade to the mental health area of Woodleigh House, which is still waiting for prioritisation.

Lyell McEwin Hospital has seen enormous changes and does great work but, without a fully functioning Modbury Hospital, people living in NALHN will never be in the same position as the people of the south, living in SALHN, who can access all the services at the Flinders Medical Centre. Moving patients between the Lyell McEwin and Modbury hospitals remains a problem without the upgrade to services. Outsourcing of patient transfers is an issue. While it might seem acceptable to say only non-urgent patients will be privately transferred, it is illogical when you consider it is mostly urgent patients who are transferred.

There is lots more to say about health, and that is why I proposed a parliamentary review of Transforming Health. Why was the motion I proposed bogged down here in the House of Assembly and adjourned on a vote of 41-2 on the Thursday before KordaMentha were called in to examine CALHN?

No-one I have spoken with believes health expenditure can be reined in in three years without an impact on patient care. I believe lots of people must have known KordaMentha were being called in on the Monday after my motion was voted down. Our health future now seems to be in the hands of bean counters rather than of health professionals. Let's hope it does not end in some sort of rationing or reprioritising of access to health care.

Pathology services are under threat. Here, I must declare a conflict of interest in that a close family member works for SA Pathology. This means I know that it is a service already working hard, not an area that can necessarily be run leaner and meaner, seeing a loss of services and training opportunities and creating an atmosphere for the outsourcing or privatisation of the service.

Electors were given matched promises about an extension to the O-Bahn car park at the Modbury-TTP interchange, servicing the state's most used public transport route—not anymore. Reprioritisation strikes again and, while other O-Bahn stations will benefit, I am told that more commuters board at the Modbury interchange. Without extra car parking, the north-east will feel the impact of this budget measure.

No new buses are being purchased and bus routes are being closed, also spelling trouble and uncertainty about the future of public transport. People need new bus routes, but not at the expense of already poor services in other areas with needs. No-one is advocating poor management of public dollars, but we do need public services, and good public transport is vital, particularly for people relying on fixed low incomes.

Changes have been made to policing, too. The closure of the Holden Hill courthouse had a big impact on the north-east. I know that there are moves afoot to try to have that courthouse reopened, and I hope that may still be the case. Housing SA rent increases are probably necessary for some tenants and probably possible for them to pay, and some tenants might need to move on to private rental, but social housing is and remains something really needed. Private rental, if you can get it, is not always an answer. For those in the least attractive Housing SA properties, a $5 increase means a decision between food, medicine or trying to keep up with energy costs.

The cost of living is a consideration for everyone but, when we get the promised reduction in the emergency services levy on one hand and lose much more in often other hidden cost increases, then it could be said that people have not been given the opportunity to compare impacts. Increases here and there all add up, and soon we see that we are shouldering more of the burden than we expected—or maybe we did expect it after all.

The closure of Service SA offices in Modbury, Prospect and Mitcham is a case in point. The as yet undisclosed cost of running these offices and the criteria for the decision is a cost shift to us. In my area, we can no longer do our business close to home. We face a longer trip to either the city, Tranmere or Elizabeth. The last time I looked, there was no direct public transport route to Tranmere and there probably are none to the Elizabeth office or Lyell McEwin Hospital, for that matter. Not only is this a problem for those unable to access services online, it will impact on the prospective learner drivers and their parents in the nine schools in our area who use this office for P-plates. Their ability to make a quick trip after school becomes a much longer exercise.

Education promises are an issue, too. Funding is now being reprioritised for local high schools eager to make the much-needed changes that they thought would be possible but that are now uncertain. TAFE closures are a real blow. At the Tea Tree Gully campus, we have been on the end of reduction of services since the closure of Celia's, our hospitality school that integrated with Regency Park. Luckily, jobs are being created at our old TAFE site through Datacom, but the training opportunities that have been lost to remaining TAFE campuses mean that our people must travel further—if they can—at a cost to them.

Training may end up being privatised, too, much like the Remand Centre. This particular budget measure will finally be all about cutting wages. Instead of picking on a particular group of workers, let's have the debate about wages. If we are living beyond our means, that is one thing; share the load evenly and fairly. But where some groups do better than others, it is dishonest to start with workers. Look after workers, whether childcare workers, aged-care workers or those who work with the NDIS. These are also job growth areas, and we need to make sure that training in these areas is readily available. That is where TAFE, and the cuts to TAFE and its training, will have an impact.

Aged-care planning needs to come up to speed very quickly. We are all going to be old and, if we are not already old, we are looking after a loved one who is. Oakden-style situations are all over Australia and can no longer be ignored or tolerated. We have tough decisions to make, and we need to consider the expectations of people who use aged care. If we cannot meet the expectation of decent, affordable care, then we need to do something about it. What is not acceptable anymore will be saying that it is a federal issue and then doing nothing about the South Australians doing it really tough while they wait for better care or the often long-off relief of a job, not an underemployment situation.

This budget grapples with some issues but leaves others out. We can have just and fair budget policies while making changes. We have good people in the Public Service. Let's hope the cut to Public Service employment leaves us with the public servants able to provide good advice and give us the ability to make good informed decisions.

Governments should never shy away from admitting mistakes have been made and should be honest in their analysis of the measures they plan to take when changing policy priorities. South Australia has led the way before and I believe can do it again. Irrespective of the party that forms government, we are charged with doing the best we can to make life as good as possible for all South Australians. Big issues need to be addressed but not at the expense of looking after the vulnerable. In the quest to get the right priorities, let's not leave anyone behind.

Bill read a second time.

Estimates Committees

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Minister for Education) (22:50): I move:

That this bill be referred to estimates committees.

Motion carried.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Minister for Education) (22:51): By leave, I move:

That a message be sent to the Legislative Council requesting that the Treasurer (Hon. R.I. Lucas), the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment (Hon. D.W. Ridgway), the Minister for Human Services (Hon. J.M.A. Lensink), and the Minister for Health and Wellbeing (Hon. S.G. Wade), members of the Legislative Council, be permitted to attend and give evidence before the estimates committees of the House of Assembly on the Appropriation Bill.

Motion carried.

Appropriation Grievances

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Minister for Education) (22:51): I move:

That the house note grievances.

Debate adjourned on motion of Dr Close.

At 22:52 the house adjourned until Wednesday 19 September 2018 at 10:30.