Bills

Appropriation Bill 2018

Estimates Committees

Debate resumed.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (20:11): Yes, welcome to fellow Lions and thank you for attending parliament. Thank you for this opportunity to speak on the report of Estimates Committees A and B, the Appropriation Bill. It gives me yet another opportunity to speak to and reflect on the Marshall government's first budget. Indeed, I am sure that for those on the other side of the house today's debate marks the closing chapter in the tale of the 2018-19 budget—move along, nothing to see here.

There have been cuts to services, closed TAFE campuses, closed Service SA centres, job losses, privatisation and attacks on South Australia's most marginalised and vulnerable. But for those of us on this side of the house who actually care about policy implementation and impact in our local communities, today is just another day in a very long campaign to hold this government to account for the decisions they have made in this budget.

No longer can the Premier or my opposite in the other place shrug their shoulders and cry, 'It wasn't me! It wasn't me!' shirking their responsibilities to the South Australian people as an elected government. They are now owners of their decisions. Henceforth, those opposite will be left to carry the can for the litany—

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

Ms COOK: —you should behave a lot better as a minister of the Crown—of bad policy decisions we are already witnessing less than a year on from the election because the truth is that being in government is hard work. Decisions must be made that directly impact on the lives of everyday South Australians, those South Australians whose care you are charged with in terms of policy and government.

In government, suddenly policy positions and actions have consequences. The fog of outrage and being incensed in opposition gives way under the weight of responsibility, and a good government makes this transition with purpose and with humility. We on this side of the house know what good government should look like. I have lived through that experience. I respect both the sanctity and the responsibility of being in government. I am proud to serve under our Leader of the Opposition, who is determined not to lead a contrary, negative opposition. As Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, we on this side of the house will continue to serve the people of South Australia with purpose through every decision we make.

Sadly, the people of South Australia are not getting that from the government opposite because government, as hard as it is, ultimately boils down to priorities. I am proud that my priorities and the priority of every member of this side of the house are better schools, advancing hospitals, better access to work, real action to climate change, a strong commitment to renewable energy, a strong economy and a reliable and state-of-the-art public transport and infrastructure network.

Labor's strong record in office reflects this, and I have been proud to see Labor initiatives, such as the North Terrace tram extension, the Torrens to Torrens South Road upgrade and the Virtual Power Plant program, to name but a few, being realised in the months since the election. I do question where the Marshall government's priorities lie for the future, however. This has been a question I have returned to time and time again as I struggle to make sense of the outright neglectful and hurtful decisions the budget has delivered to many of the people in South Australia. That was sadly borne out through the estimates process.

We know that affordable housing for South Australia's most vulnerable does not appear to be a priority for the Marshall government. We know this because of the attack on bedsit and one-bedroom cottage Housing Trust tenants, with rent rises of as much as $10 per week, going up and up over the forward estimates. When asked in estimates what consultation the minister had undertaken with the Housing Trust tenants, with the housing sector more broadly, with the Housing Trust Tenants Association or, to be frank, with anybody, the minister advised that that is not how policy formulation, consultation or implementation was typically handled.

In fact, I recall being told that it is impossible to do that in opposition as you do not have access to people. Well, I do not have any trouble accessing people. They come to us and we go out in our communities and actively engage, so I do not buy that. This response has become a hallmark of the 2018-19 Marshall budget, with proper community consultation abandoned for the sake of political expediency and delivery on policies that have been poorly thought out.

Decisions that affect hundreds and thousands of South Australians have been foisted upon them by stealth by a government that did not have the guts or the courage of its own convictions to publicise what it really stood for before the election. I have read the material. There is nothing about $10 rent increases on our most vulnerable, making it harder for thousands of South Australians already doing it tough to afford to put food on the table, fuel in their car, buy their medications or stay out of an already full hospital system.

There was nothing about the closure of three Service SA centres, making it harder for South Australians to pay their bills, acquire a licence or register their cars. Not all people in South Australia have access to high-speed broadband. Not all South Australians have the luxury of being able to use the internet or, indeed, get to another centre further away from their homes. There was nothing about closing seven TAFE campuses, making it harder for young South Australians in the regions and suburbs to equip themselves with the skills and experience they will need for the world of work.

A precedent has now been set that I look forward to returning to in the lead-up to the 2022 election. Now we know that anything the government promises or advertises in the lead-up to polling day cannot be trusted because it may well change. The public despise a government that promises one thing but delivers another. We will hold the Premier and my opposite minister responsible for this each and every single day between now and Saturday 19 March 2022.

The estimates process yielded a number of issues that surprised me and, I think, speak to both the priorities and the management style of the Marshall Liberal government. For example, the free volunteer screening checks—an election commitment of the Marshall government—could have in fact been introduced as indicated and suggested and allowed to be understood much earlier in the piece, at any time, through a regulatory process.

With regard to the change in regulations to alter the fee to zero dollars, the minister has not been able to provide information as yet as to any briefing regarding that, but I am sure that that will come and we will see that this could have been put in place much earlier so that organisations spending many thousands of dollars on volunteer screening fees would have been able to either (a) budget for it or prepare for it or (b) have it in place.

Do not get me wrong, I am really grateful. I think it is one of the best policies that I saw being rolled out, because we should have no barrier to volunteering, but organisations in my electorate, and the many dozens and dozens of them that I have consulted with since the election, felt that this was coming in on 1 July. It is disappointing that the delay of the measure has been so protracted, with many volunteer organisations being very unhappy, as they are on the rocks and have to spend many thousands of dollars out of unbudgeted funds to pay, waiting until January next year.

I am pleased that it has been brought forward to 1 November. I am glad that that lobbying from the sector and from others in this place has been effective and that this has been brought forward. I thank the government for that. I have to say I remain extremely concerned regarding the government's budgeted increase of only 844 screening applicants for 2018-19, despite the introduction of free screening checks. With these free checks, I am quite concerned that that number will climb extremely high.

What is more disappointing is that the minister was not able to tell us the cost of the government's signature election promise to give free checks to volunteers. My colleague the member for Elizabeth and I have asked many questions of the Minister for Police concerning the future of VOAN checks through SAPOL. I asked many questions in estimates about this. I look forward to his response. There was much confusion at the estimates table concerning the future of these checks and its intersection with the free screening checks to be offered through DHS.

I was also disappointed to learn through estimates that small community organisations, both in my electorate and throughout the state, missed the opportunity to purchase and replace equipment, given the freeze in the grant process following the 2018 election. This was also unannounced. There were three months at least where no grant funding was available. It was waved off when I asked questions in estimates about this.

No consultation was undertaken before the freeze was implemented. Many missed out on the opportunity to apply for much-needed funds. These small items purchased under the grants program can mean the difference for community organisations in terms of them being able to deliver their programs. It enables them to replace small pieces of equipment that have worn out or to purchase new pieces of equipment for innovative programs. So it is disappointing.

When it comes to youth, I am saddened to report that not much is happening there. No new investment was provided for the youth portfolio for 2018-19, nor was the minister able to articulate whom she has met with or how often in the youth portfolio. I am saddened that young South Australians seem to be being left behind by this indifferent government.

I also asked questions of the minister regarding the government's decision to privatise supported disability accommodation. I was frustrated by the lack of information provided by the minister. What consultation has the government undertaken with clients, workers and the broader sector when it comes to privatisation of disability accommodation? Nothing but crickets. How and when was this communicated to clients, workers and families, each concerned for their welfare, the welfare of their loved ones and their job security? There was nothing at all.

There were two small lines in the Liberal policy platform online about privatisation and outsourcing of supported disability accommodation—nothing. No consultation and no forewarning. There are hundreds of families and residents who are all very upset and very frightened for their future, and about 1,300 workers.

I would like to take the opportunity to touch on the importance of education. I would like to congratulate the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on the fantastic work that she is doing as shadow minister for education and also on the work she did firstly as minister for education. As I travel through schools, I learn that, without doubt, our shadow minister for education is one of the most loved and popular ministers that schools have ever had. There is an enormous amount of respect for her, and I think that has set us in good stead to carry on forward as we go through in opposition, supporting schools.

Education sets the foundation for life and I am really proud that I was part of a Labor government that for decades prioritised the investment in our schools in order to provide engaging, innovative environments to take learning into the future. The spending on our schools during the last term of our government was in the billions of dollars—a solid, thoughtful, targeted and certainly much needed investment.

I have attended a few openings of STEM facilities with the Minister for Education. I know this is a bipartisan supported project that is much appreciated by everybody. As the STEM facilities are opened, there is a procession of joyful ribbon cutting. I am hearing some wonderful stories about young people and what they are able to do with their education whilst in these new and innovative spaces. They are modern. They are spacious. They are inspiring.

However, I am very concerned about the moneys that were committed to be invested in the Building Better Schools fund. I am worried that much of the planning for how to spend this funding to benefit schools and the community in general will have been for nothing, and I am very concerned for schools in my electorate. Reynella East College, a P to 12 school of around 1,700 students, will only grow under proposed changes by the Liberal government and the movement of year 7s to high school. Woodcroft Primary School, which currently has a population of around 800 students, will have students move off. Both these schools have made big plans.

I was part of a big consultation process for Reynella East as they looked into the future and set up some dreams and aspirations for the community around arts and sporting spaces that could be used by our community, as well as by the school. They had commenced engaging with all levels in government and they were scoping external groups and clubs to partner in the build and in the use of the facilities. They have done an enormous amount of work.

The full development would cost $17 million, so the money already committed by the Labor government would go a long way towards funding this. There would be performing arts complexes, basketball, volleyball, netball, badminton, change rooms, retractable seating, classrooms and function spaces. This is a school that does not have a space big enough to hold its graduation ceremonies.

This visionary complex would be able to host state, national and international sporting competitions, as well as other activities. The school had given a deputation to the City of Onkaparinga and was truly excited. We do not know what is happening there. There is no better news for Woodcroft Primary School either. In fact, they are worried that they are not going to be able to commence any planning for another two years, so I am not sure what is going to happen there.

The educators and the communities know that this investment in our young people would pay us back in spades. My community is committed to helping young people at school develop into well-grounded and well-rounded adults and these learning spaces would have helped them to do that, so I hope that the Minister for Education listens and goes to speak to my schools to see what it is that they have planned for the future.

In the last four minutes, I would like to respond to the member for Waite. The member for Waite's speech was interesting. Adjunct Associate Professor Elizabeth Dabars is no Labor stooge. She is a role model for tens of thousands of nurses within this state. She is a leader. People aspire to be as strong and as informed as Elizabeth Dabars. There are 30,000 nursing members of the Australian nursing and midwifery union.

They do not just provide representation industrially; they provide education and they provide support and advocacy. That speech, given under parliamentary privilege, slandering the name of Elizabeth Dabars and making allegations about her that were completely untrue, is a blight on this parliament and it should be retracted. The member for Waite cannot, in opposition, make friends with community leaders like Elizabeth Dabars and quote her on his website—2½ paragraphs worth of accolades on her advocacy opposing Transforming Health, and laud her for this only 12 months ago, and then 12 months later accuse her of being some Labor stooge. It is an outrage and it will not be forgotten.

Neither will samduluk.com.au be forgotten, as we continue to wade our way through the history of his sudden memory lapses, such as his friendship and accolades for Elizabeth Dabars, such as his sudden loss of capacity to advocate for epilepsy in South Australia. Who is next? What organisation with which he was friends in opposition will he forget next? Will it be Autism SA? Will it be the CFS or will it simply be the people of the Adelaide Hills?

You cannot be friends with someone and give them accolades and applause and talk about them like they are the pinnacle of advocacy in the healthcare system and leave that sitting on your website and then come out and slam them and make false accusations about them. He needs to retract that or, I can tell you, it is going to be a very long, dark, cold 3½ years in government for the Liberal Party, who are making enemies of someone who has been an independent, fearless and frank voice for the healthcare system.

Motion carried.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (20:32): I move:

That the remainder of the bill be agreed to.

Motion carried.

Third Reading

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (20:32): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.