House of Assembly Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1) 54 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Springbank Road Intersection Springbank Road Intersection Mrs POWER House of Assembly Elder Springbank Road Intersection Mrs POWER (Elder) (14:44): My question is to the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Local Government. Can the minister inform the house about the state government's plans to fix the Springbank intersection? The Hon. S.K. KNOLL House of Assembly Schubert Minister for Transport Minister for Planning Springbank Road Intersection The Hon. S.K. KNOLL (Schubert—Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Local Government, Minister for Planning) (14:44): I thank the member for Elder for her question and for her advocacy, along with the member for Waite's and the federal member for Boothby's advocacy in relation to this project. Can I say that this is a project that typifies the difference in approach between the former government and the current government in relation to infrastructure. There could not be a more stark example. The first fact is that when we say that something is funded it is because it is funded, and no amount of rhetoric and commentary and press release can cover off on the fact that if it's not in a budget line it's not in the budget. What the former government was trying to do was use a few fancy words at the top of the page to say, 'No, that's okay. We've already funded the Springbank Road intersection. We can't tell you how much it's going to cost and we aren't going to tell you who is going to fund that, but just trust us—the money is there.' Well, it quite seriously and quite factually isn't there because it wasn't explicit in the budget. If it was funded, it would have been explicit in the budget, alongside every other new investment project that was outlined in the 2017-18 budget statement. The second reason, and perhaps the most important reason that this government takes a different approach, is that we actually listen to the facts and the experts we hire to tell us what the best thing to do is. What we've got is a government that is more interested in wasting taxpayers' money on inferior proposals when the facts do not stack up. It would be interesting to know whether or not the facts as they have been presented to me in government are the same facts that were presented to members of the opposition when they were in government. The truth is that the former government's design for the Springbank Road/Goodwood Road/Daws Road intersection—get this—would actually have made traffic worse in the morning peak. I don't know what sort of incompetence there is— Mr Duluk interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Waite is warned. The Hon. S.K. KNOLL House of Assembly The Hon. S.K. KNOLL: —that you go and spend tens of millions of dollars to actually make traffic worse. If the former government and current Labor opposition want to continue to push an argument that making traffic worse is the best way to go, then be my guest. What we said quite clearly when we went to the election is that we were actually going to listen to the facts, we were going to listen to the experts, we were going to listen to those who we pay good money to tell us what the best way is to spend taxpayers' money. The Hon. L.W.K. Bignell interjecting: The Hon. S.K. KNOLL House of Assembly The Hon. S.K. KNOLL: To give you a clear and stark example, in the a.m. peak the former government's design would have made traffic worse by four seconds on average. That is not a good outcome. In fact, one would suggest that maybe you shouldn't do the intersection if you are going to actually make traffic worse. By contrast, ours is actually going to save about 40 seconds in the a.m. peak, but what we are going to do in the afternoon peak is deliver 2½ minutes of average time-saving for the 60,000 people who use this intersection every single day. That's what governments do: they go out and fight for good policy based on fact rather than on innuendo or some deals that may or may not have been done at a minister's office in relation to who gets what. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order, members on my left! The minister has the call. The Hon. S.K. KNOLL House of Assembly The Hon. S.K. KNOLL: We are actually listening to the evidence and the science, and we will stand up and fight for what is right and what is the best use of taxpayers' money every single day of the week. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The member for Mawson has been interjecting, but I was a bit harsh on the last day of sitting, so I will let him off. The member for Lee.