Appropriation Bill 2019

Appropriation Grievances

Adjourned debate on motion to note grievances.

(Continued from 3 July 2019.)

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (16:53): It is a great opportunity to speak today on the 2019-20 Marshall government's state budget that was handed down by the Treasurer a few weeks ago. It is certainly a budget that will build on this government's first budget, which delivered on all its election commitments, while at the same time cleaning up the mess left to it by the former government. To refresh, those commitments were to lower costs, create more jobs and provide better services. This 2019-20 budget continues to progress this government's priorities of increasing economic growth and jobs and also providing better public services for South Australians.

In between these two budgets, there has been unfortunately a significant reduction in the expectation of the GST revenue coming into the state as a result of changes to how the available national GST pool is allocated. It is principally because of weaker national consumption expenditure and also a softer housing market that has reduced investment in dwellings, but there has also been a decrease in South Australia's share of the GST grants. Combined, these changes result in an expected reduction in GST revenue of some $2.1 billion over the next four years.

This softer housing market that I mentioned has also meant a reduction in expected conveyance duty revenue of approximately $184 million over these four years. One wonders how much of a dampener the possible election of a high-taxing Bill Shorten government had on consumer confidence and certainly the retreat of investment dollars of aspirational Australians into our economy. Thankfully, as you and many others would agree, the Morrison government was re-elected on 18 May. It is an election result that bodes well not only for Australia but for South Australia as well. It really would be a positive if, in some future budgets, these GST writedowns were not as large as have been estimated at this point in time.

However, we can only deal with what we have. Faced with these significant writedowns in our GST revenue, the government has chosen to continue to encourage economic growth and jobs growth and not put the handbrake on some of the positive signs of growth being shown here in South Australia since the Marshall government was elected in March 2018. Certainly last year's budget set a strong foundation. We made some difficult decisions at the time, aiming to create a surplus budget and then allowing these surpluses to continue in the future.

The 2018-19 budget is estimated to be a small surplus of approximately $100 million, and then each year from now the budget is projected to be in surplus through to 2022-23. This is certainly in contrast to seven deficits in the 10 previous years from the former government. Faced with this significant writedown in GST revenue, fees and charges have increased in the budget to cope with this. However, the budget still contains commitments that the Marshall government took to the election and that have been delivered via this budget and last year's budget. These include the promise to reduce the emergency services levy by $90 million each year.

For a family with a median-valued house valued at $480,000, the saving next year will be $163 compared with the payment it would have been without these ESL remissions and what was policy under the former Labor government. For a family with a house value of $750,000, the saving is much greater at $254. In addition to these costs, the costs of running a car will reduce as of 1 July (just gone), with compulsory third-party premiums for running a car in the metropolitan area reducing by up to $114 for each car.

For households with two cars, this can be a saving of more than $200 for each household. The Treasurer outlined in his budget speech that there are 340,000 households in South Australia that fall into this category of having more than one car. Another cost initiative that is certainly very popular in my electorate and others is the continuation of the $100 sports vouchers that can go towards the cost of membership or registration fees for primary school-aged children. Businesses also benefit from the reduction in their ESL bills and the abolition of payroll tax in last year's budget.

Small businesses with payrolls up to $1.5 million will have no payroll tax applicable. In addition, this budget begins the process of reducing the top land tax rate by 0.1 per cent per year to become 2.9 per cent from 1 July 2027. To go with this responsible management to create a sustainable budget position that delivers lower costs, the budget also builds a better future for South Australia with major investments in our public infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools and roads in both metropolitan Adelaide and also the regions. This $11.9 billion investment into productive infrastructure to help grow our economy will create a lot of activity and will lead to more South Australian jobs.

Just this week, the RBA governor, Philip Lowe, made the following points on how governments throughout Australia, from Queensland to Victoria, Liberal or Labor, can push the economy forward. Mr Lowe said, 'One option is fiscal support, including through spending on infrastructure.' He went on to say:

Another option is structural policies that support firms expanding, investing, innovating and employing people. A strong, dynamic, competitive business sector generates jobs.

I think you will agree, Mr Deputy Speaker, that this is exactly what this government is doing. I talked about the payroll tax, the emergency services levy cuts, the land tax and now also the $11.9 billion into infrastructure investment.

If I can just touch on some of those investments across this state, there has been a significant investment of $3.2 billion into road infrastructure in both regional South Australia and metropolitan Adelaide to make regional roads safer and also to bust congestion in high-use intersections throughout Adelaide. One such project is the grade separation at the Hove crossing on Brighton Road, a $171 million project and certainly one of those that will bust congestion. It is a joint state and federal government initiative. I know that the member for Black and the member for Gibson, as well as the federal member for Boothby, have been instrumental in ensuring that funding occurs for that intersection.

It is certainly a very busy intersection and, while just outside the electorate of Morphett, in the afternoon pick-up time, because of the significant number of times the boom gate comes down, the roads are quite congested right up through to Somerton Park, which is part of the electorate I represent in Morphett. So it will certainly be very welcome not only to those in Gibson and Black but also to the constituents of Morphett. This project, and other intersection upgrades like this, will slash commute times and, in so doing, will make our city more livable and boost productivity. Some of the commuters who come along Brighton Road will no doubt be travelling either to or from Glenelg Primary School, depending on the time of day.

This is a fantastic local school where, alongside the Premier and the Minister for Education, this government announced a landmark high-speed internet project with Telstra worth more than $80 million that will connect nearly every government school here in South Australia to high-speed fibre-optic internet. Glenelg Primary was one of the first schools to connect, and just this week we had the Minister for Education inform us that 111 schools have now been connected. This project is part of a comprehensive investment into public education in this state. It also includes the transition of year 7 into high school to match what has happened across the rest of Australia.

I would like to touch on some other initiatives that will be welcomed in Morphett, particularly around Morphettville, which is, of course, home to thoroughbred racing here in South Australia at the Morphettville Racecourse, but also in the surrounding area of Morphettville, such as along Bray Street and Morphett Road, where a number of horse trainers have their stables situated. The initiative is a $24 million racing industry support package, which is in addition to the $4.85 million this government provided in last year's budget.

As I said, this budget allocates $24 million to assist the industry starting with $8 million this year, which includes $4 million for general industry assistance and also $4 million for infrastructure upgrades. This will be very valuable to the racing industry and will keep racing here thriving. Future years will see the racing industry receive 1.5 per cent of the net wagering revenue from the betting operations tax, which is a similar formula to that received by the Victorian racing industry.

As I said, the infrastructure upgrades will certainly improve the sustainability of the industry here and, while not trying to compete with Sydney and Melbourne racing carnivals, it will certainly compete against those regional Victorian and New South Wales racing meets. It will allow trainers to be based in South Australia and employ local jockeys and stable hands. This budget builds a better future for the people of Morphett and South Australia.

Mr SZAKACS (Cheltenham) (17:03): I rise also on the Appropriation Bill 2019 largely to put on the record my disappointment in the failings this budget has for the western suburbs of Adelaide and the contempt for local residents and also for the business community, for the schools and of course for the community at large in the west. It is not a great surprise that the west feels abandoned by this budget by this government, the same government that only a couple of months ago chose to not even run a candidate in the Cheltenham by-election in which I was lucky enough to be elected.

This is a budget that right at the heart cuts two hours of free parking at The QEH. To put this in some context, this is a saving per year in the cuts to The QEH car parking that is less than a ministerial office spends in a year, less than the Minister for Health's ministerial office spends in one year. This is a joke. I am not sure what in-kind legal support the Attorney receives in a year, but I am sure that it is somewhere up around that as well.

It is mean-spirited and it also spreads the pain to local residents in the west. We know that local residents around The QEH are already feeling the strain from car parking as people look to longer term car parks. They have raised this with me. It was one of the reasons the former Labor government announced and started to build the 500-car car park at The QEH—to attempt to alleviate some of this pain for local residents.

It is because of these policies that local residents in the west now need to decide on the frequency with which they receive care from The QEH. Is it guided by clinical care? Is it guided by the best advice from their medical professional, or is it about how much car parking they can afford? These residents attend weekly; they attend biweekly. They have already spoken to me and said, 'We simply can't afford to attend The QEH with the frequency which we expect under these new changes.'

No matter how you end up at The QEH—whether you drive there to see a sick or unwell family member, whether you are unlucky enough to be under the care of The QEH itself, or whether you attend in an ambulance—your fees, your costs of going to hospital to seek care, are going up. That is just a small part of the $500 million in new fees that this budget implements. It is a kick in the guts for the local residents of the western suburbs.

Perhaps it is the brazenness of the government's approach that is leaving even the most ardent cynics scratching their heads. We have also seen a massive increase in debt—$20 billion in debt. That is a strange thing in that those rusted-on economic and fiscal conservatives on the government benches are simply silent. Comrades on the other side of this chamber are silent when it comes to the enormous debt that, even under the Treasurer's own advice, will not be paid off in his lifetime.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you would expect that after 16 years in opposition this government would have had some time to properly articulate in an unambiguous way their vision for their pledge to this state, to the people of the state. Their pledge was this: more jobs, lower costs and better services. This government have not only failed in every single measure but they have also simply stopped trying. They have broken their promises and commitments. They say one thing in opposition and do another in government. It is in this time of post-truth in politics that this government are doing their utmost to live by the mantra that if you simply say something enough it becomes reality. Well, the reality is far from that.

This is a government that claims to be pro small business. They have almost in an evangelical manner cut and gutted programs that support and reward creativity, entrepreneurship. They scrap and gut programs that promote local South Australians supporting local businesses. At the heart of this is also the abject failure of a plan for jobs, jobs that South Australians need so badly, a plan to transition young people from their formative years in education or training into real and meaningful work, a plan for secure and meaningful jobs, a plan to help people find a job that they can count on in an environment where wage growth continues to stagnate. It makes people in our community worry and lose sleep because they simply do not know where their next job will come from. There is simply no plan. This government has abandoned working families.

In the west, they are failing working families and businesses alike, just as they have failed to deliver the promised upgrade to the Cheltenham Parade-Port Road intersection. It is an intersection that I travel on daily, and I know that the member for Lee also travels on daily, as it sits on the border of our two great electorates of Cheltenham and Lee. Every day, 43,000 vehicles use that intersection. Even though funding was provided in February 2018 to upgrade that intersection, we are still no closer, there is still no plan and there is still no start date. The residents of the west continue to drive through that intersection, through the congestion, and spend time there because of the lack of attention to the west, rather than spending time with their families, time at work or time contributing and being productive in our economy.

If commuters sought to look to our trains and our trams for relief, well, the government said, 'Hold my beer,' because we have privatisation or we have franchising. When the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure was talking about franchising, I am not sure whether he was talking about his dad's butcher, but no matter what way you look at it this is privatisation. The government can continue to be cute about what this is, but the public see through this. In the short amount of time since this has been announced, the public and the residents of the western suburbs of Adelaide are rightly outraged.

They are rightly outraged about what this means for our public transport system. The government have pointed to Melbourne and they have pointed to London. Of course, we know how that went. What seemingly was a good day on social media for the Premier and the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure turned into an embarrassing backflip because, of course, we know that the London Underground was such a failure that it was re-engaged into public hands and continues to be to this day.

I can look back to the ETSA debacle. Sadly, the same Treasurer was involved in that, and it seems as though the promises that were made back then around price freezes, and now fare freezes, are simply occurring in the echo chamber of this pursuit towards privatisation. When it comes to trains and trams, 21 years after the failings of ETSA we have the new conductor, minister Knoll, who is ushering us all aboard the ETSA express. He promises that it is going to be a one-way stop to better service, lower fares and better outcomes for the government. Well, the residents of the western suburbs of Adelaide know that is rubbish.

Whether you are a motorist, a commuter, a hospital patient, a small business, a renter or a property owner, you have every right to feel abandoned by this budget, or you have had the right to feel that the social contract the government set before the election has been torn up. Our message is very clear on this side of the house: we will fight privatisations and we will stand up for our community.

The Hon. T.J. WHETSTONE (Chaffey—Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development) (17:13): I would like to make a small contribution to the Appropriation Bill and the 2019 budget. We have heard a lot of negativity from the other side, but there is also a lot good. I think that it is a budget that has had some real challenges set as its foundation. As some might realise—and some might choose to forget—there is an $2.1 billion GST shortfall over the next four years. That really does set the tone for the challenges that South Australia and the government face in setting our budgets and looking at ways that we can best spend to create economic prosperity and to create an economic opportunity here in South Australia.

At the same time, looking at what the GST challenge will mean, we are still picking up the pieces of what a previous government have left behind. I think we will look forward now, and as a responsible government we will work to look at how we can bring South Australia to prosperity, how we can drive the confidence that we can instil in business and external investment into South Australia so that we can look at ways to create jobs and ways to have infrastructure spend. It cannot just be totally reliant on the government spending on infrastructure and putting money into major projects. We have to bring private money in so that we can get a better balance, a better state of play when it comes to South Australia rebuilding after a long time, in particular in the regions of South Australia.

We have seen some record spending into the regions of South Australia. It has been a stimulus. I particularly see this travelling around the regions, which I do extensively, not only as someone who lives in the regions but as a minister responsible for regional development and primary industries. The messages I am getting very loud and clear are that we are putting a stimulus in place to drive some confidence so that we do see external investment into our regions and particularly into metropolitan Adelaide.

We look at Lot Fourteen. That is a huge incubator. It is a huge stimulus for developing entrepreneurship, looking at developing what industries we think can be part of our future, not only the space and defence industries but the large amount of tech and the large amount of cyber that comes into South Australia's grasp. If we can just bring that in, harness that energy and harness the potential for a future in South Australia, I am positive that this will be a huge stimulus.

I want to touch a little bit on primary industries. For many years we have seen primary industries that really have been kicked around, and they have received little attention and little infrastructure spend. By and large, the departments that are responsible for the regions and primary industries have been belted from pillar to post. In every budget leading up to the 2018 budget, we have seen no money put into initiatives in primary industries. We have seen reductions in SARDI, we have seen reductions in Biosecurity SA and we have seen reductions in the stimulus, the R&D programs, that those sectors rely on.

I have talked in this place many times about some of the core platforms that the primary industries rely on: grain, red meat, wine, horticulture, tourism. We know that a previous government used to shine the light on tourism, but it was always an hour or two's travel from Adelaide. It was never much further away than that, and if it was it might have been a slip of the pen. What we are seeing now are the opportunities we would like to create as a government. It is about stimulating a conversation and driving confidence for businesses out in those far-reach areas. Whether it is regional South Australia or outback South Australia, we are seeing some stimulus there.

This is not only for initiatives within tourism. We see that an extra $30 million has gone into marketing to help drive and continue to drive tourism within South Australia, but we also see the economic growth, the opportunities. This is not only through the Regional Growth Fund and not only through infrastructure spend. There are also initiatives, R&D programs. There is the $7½ million dollars into the Red Meat and Wool Growth Program.

We have seen now the collaboration between the commonwealth government and the state government, and it is not just about the $1.1 billion that is going out into regional South Australia for fixing up long, problematic roads that have been ignored for a long, long time. We look at money that has gone into the Horrocks Highway. We look at money that is going into the connection from the West Coast to the western border. We look at the money that has gone into the Sturt Highway—$87 million. That is one of the busiest highways, one of the busiest logistical routes in South Australia.

There are almost 10,000 vehicles a day, and a large percentage of those vehicles are commercial vehicles—trucks by and large. We look at the upgrade of those trucks and their capacity and road trains on a lot of our roads to try to drive some efficiencies. We are responding by not only finding efficiencies in those roads but understanding where those roads need to go.

We need to draw attention to some of the money that has gone in there. Allocations of money that have gone into Biosecurity SA have been great initiatives. We know there has been a $25 million collaboration between commonwealth, state and industry. It has been a long time coming and it is here. The pastoralists, the industry leaders, including Livestock SA, by and large have welcomed this initiative with open arms, and rightfully so.

This year we have seen many more than 20,000 lambs taken by wild dogs. There is an initiative that is safeguarding a livestock sector—the sheep industry and the beef industry—that is under siege because of not only wild dogs but also drought and high feed and grain prices, so we have to do everything we can to help them. We look at ways that we are now putting audits in place so that we can actually supply the intensive livestock sector.

These are initiatives that we are putting in place to provide support against the prolonged deficiencies, if you like, that are coming with the vagaries of primary production. We have worked again with the commonwealth. As far as the state budget goes, it is what surrounds the budget. It is about working with the commonwealth, bringing drought initiatives into South Australia, futureproofing businesses and our farms so that when we do encounter dry, drought and those hardships, we are better prepared.

It is about putting the water infrastructure in place, and there is now money on the table. It is about putting in the $1 million for 25 councils here in South Australia. They are initiatives that sit next to the budget because we need to put in building blocks to futureproof and droughtproof our farms. The amount of $7½ million is about helping to support an industry that is one of the main platforms of our economy.

We know we have to put initiatives in place to put accountability into our red meat sector. We have seen a number of issues with some of our export markets that have created some headwind for growing some of those free trade agreements that we are now becoming very much more reliant on. So to drive that red meat and wool program is a very important seed-funding initiative that the industry will build on, just like the external investment at Thomas Foods and the external infrastructure going into that project.

We look at the external infrastructure that is going into the South-East around Teys Brothers. We look at working with the communities in the South-East so that we can house more migrants through the DAMA. We look at initiatives that will help those businesses down there. It is not about putting money directly into their pockets: it is about putting initiatives and infrastructure around those projects so that as a government we are acting responsibly in helping to drive one of the main economies. A small amount of money has recently gone into the blueprint for the grains industry. Again, that gives the industry targets and opportunities to grow, just like this budget does.

Mr BOYER (Wright) (17:23): I, too, rise to speak on this Appropriation Bill, although I think the big question on everyone's lips at the moment is: how many Liberal members of parliament does it take to turn off a light? The answer is four from what I have witnessed today—very impressive work, indeed.

This second budget from the Marshall Liberal government, much like the one before it, is certainly no new agenda for South Australia. In fact, it is just a continuation of an agenda that began all the way back in 1993 and was rudely interrupted by the election of a Labor government in 2002. I think we have seen no better example of this than the announcement this week that the state's tram and train network will be privatised.

We must remember, of course, that it was a former Liberal government in this state that privatised our bus system back in 2000. It is very clear now that the Treasurer had intended to complete that privatisation agenda all those years ago but had to wait until being re-elected last year to do so. I think he spent those 16 years in opposition sitting quietly in his office in this place fuming and working out how he was going to take revenge, and it has begun.

We should not be surprised, then, that this is taking place, except for the fact that before the last state election the Premier told people publicly—and we have all seen it on video again this week—that he did not have a privatisation agenda. Perhaps the Premier does not have a privatisation agenda, but the Treasurer certainly does, and everyone in this place knows who is calling the shots in the cabinet room. That agenda is now in full swing.

In 16 short months we have seen not just the privatisation of the train and tram network but we have also seen the announced privatisation of the Adelaide Remand Centre, the planned privatisation of patient transfers between Modbury and Lyell McEwin hospitals and the threat of privatisation continually hanging over SA Pathology. This is about, at its heart, reliable, low-cost services for South Australians. It is a concept that you would be forgiven for thinking this government understood, given that it went to the last state election with a mantra of lower costs and better services.

It may well have been better costs and lower services—not better costs for South Australians but better costs for the Treasurer. Clearly, this was just another throwaway line, just like the line the Premier used, the assurance he gave publicly, that he did not have a privatisation agenda. As of Tuesday this week, 1 July, we saw the commencement of the government's higher fees, charges and taxes: half a billion dollars of hip pocket pain that will hit motorists, public transport commuters, hospital patients, small businesses, property owners, tradies, regional communities and mining companies, just to name a few. Do not for a second think that these are adjustments just for CPI.

Do not think for a second that the government is adjusting these fees and charges by just 1.3 per cent. We are talking about an increase in motor vehicle transaction fees of up to 42 per cent, an increase in tradie expenses of up to 10 per cent, an increase in motor registration fees of 5 per cent, an increase in driver's licence renewals of 4.5 per cent, an increase in public transport fares of 2 per cent, and, most notably, as we have heard, an increase in the solid waste levy of firstly 10 per cent and then 40 per cent from 1 January.

If this is not hypocritical enough for you, local councils are now burdened with the dilemma of whether or not they can absorb that 40 per cent increase in the solid waste levy, or whether they have to pass it on to their ratepayers. In the north and north-eastern suburbs, Tea Tree Gully and Salisbury councils have already voted to increase rates by an additional 0.2 and 0.4 per cent respectively in direct response to the increase in the solid waste levy. If elected members of those councils had voted to pass on the full cost of the levy hike, it would have meant an additional 0.7 per cent increase in council rates simply due to the increase in the solid waste levy.

But, if that hypocrisy is not breathtaking enough, this is from a government that has been advocating for a cap to council rates whilst simultaneously cost shifting enormous amounts of money on to the very same councils that they are demanding cap their rates. That hypocrisy was summed up beautifully in the very same week that we heard the announcement about the solid waste levy going up by 40 per cent. In my letterbox in Gulfview Heights, I got a lovely glossy brochure from the Hon. John Dawkins in another place—who is a terrific bloke, I might add—espousing the virtues of rate capping. What impeccable timing.

At its core this is really, as the Leader of the Opposition mentioned after question time today, an issue about credibility, and that is the credibility of the Premier of South Australia. This Premier's track record so far is a litany of commitments not met: things he said he would do that he has not done, and things he said he would not do that he has. There is no better example of this government's failure to keep its commitments than what is happening in the north-eastern suburbs: no mention of closing the Modbury Service SA centre before the election, not a squeak; an unequivocal promise to never, ever again privatise Modbury Hospital or any of the services that are attached to it; and no mention that the contract to build the new park-and-ride at Tea Tree Plaza would be scrapped.

All that really leaves us in terms of projects that are occurring in the north-eastern suburbs of Adelaide are legacy projects from the previous state Labor government. Even these, according to this budget, are being whittled away. The budget papers show that the upgrade of Modbury Hospital is now way behind schedule. In fact, of the $22.6 million that was budgeted to be spent on the upgrade in the 2018-19 financial year, only $7 million has been spent.

The member for King and the member for Newland are very fond of posing for photos and videos in front of the building, in front of the scaffolding that is there, with the Minister for Health, but I can tell you that the residents of the north-eastern suburbs have very long memories—very long memories indeed. They remember what happened last time this party was in government and the privatisation of that hospital, and they are not easily fooled. The Lyell McEwin Hospital has not escaped either. The much-needed expansion, a doubling of the emergency department, has been delayed now by 12 months despite some of the worst ramping that we have ever seen in this state occurring there now on a routine basis.

Then there is the upgrade of the Golden Grove Road. The former Labor government committed $20 million to this project in the 2017 Mid-Year Budget Review. It was not an election commitment; it was money that we committed. That was matched by those opposite. When I say 'matched', what they really meant was that they were committing to not cut the funding we had already given.

Now we know even that was not true. At the very same Tea Tree Gully council meeting where the solid waste levy was being considered, it was inadvertently revealed that this government is going cap in hand to the council again, this time to demand $2 million of ratepayers' money towards the upgrade of The Golden Grove Road.

But there is one item in the budget that says more about the priorities of this government than any other, and that is the huge increase in the cost of car parking at hospitals. It is one thing to shift the burden of making savings onto local councils, but it is another thing altogether to push that burden onto hospital staff, patients and the loved ones of patients. At Modbury Hospital, the annual cost of parking for staff will rise by $725 a year, from $562 to $1,287. That is an increase of 129 per cent. The cost will rise by 20 per cent for patients and their families, too. Add to this a jump of 5 per cent in ambulance fees, which is going to see the cost of an emergency 1 callout fee rise by $49, breaking the $1,000 threshold for the first time.

If anyone who is listening is surprised by the magnitude of these increases, if anyone is surprised by the fact that hospital staff and patients are being targeted by this government for their savings task, all they need to remember is that we have a Premier who proudly told us before the election that he was not in it for the social issues. What little shred of credibility this government had left is all but gone. It was sorely tested last year in a budget of cuts, closures and privatisations, but it has all but evaporated now that this government has reached its hands into the pockets of some of the state's most vulnerable people.

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL (Mawson) (17:33): This is a terrible budget for South Australia: mean, tricky, nasty and full of actions that go against what the Liberal Party promised the people of South Australia when they went to the election last time. It is a direct repeat of what happened the last time the Liberals were in power, when they said they would never, ever privatise ETSA, but they did. We have seen that now with what they are intending to do with the tram and rail networks here in South Australia.

The meanness of this budget has hit home right across the seat of Mawson, and nowhere more than on Kangaroo Island, a place that is 4,500 square kilometres with 4,500 people. It has a set of—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Mawson, I will give you a few extra seconds.

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL: Thank you very much, I appreciate that. Kangaroo Island is a very special part of South Australia. It has a set of unique circumstances that mean the people over there need a bit of a hand because of the isolation they face. The only way you can get to and from the island is via ferry or by flying in and out.

For years and years, there was a concession for people who owned motor vehicles on Kangaroo Island. This budget has done away with that. We will now see the 50 per cent rebate or discount that the people of Kangaroo Island had for their vehicles taken away. If you have a tipper truck, where you are paying $1,500 rego with the discount, you will now be paying $3,000. All the people who own farm vehicles or cars they drive around the island will also be slugged with a doubling of the price.

You wonder what is behind a government that makes this sort of decision. I have asked ministers in questions on notice whether they have been to Kangaroo Island since the election of last year. We are talking 16 months. I have had some responses, and it turns out that half the cabinet has not been to Kangaroo Island since the election 16 months ago. How are you meant to look after a part of South Australia that faces a heap of unique challenges if you do not go there?

The second question I asked these ministers was: when was the last time you went? I believe that some of those seven ministers have never, ever been to Kangaroo Island. Not one of the ministers has responded to that. They referred me to the previous answer that was given, which was: have you been there since the election last year? I think it is time for these ministers to fess up. I want to know: have they been to Kangaroo Island ever in their lives? I am just going to go through the seven ministers who have not been to Kangaroo Island since the election.

The Hon. R. Sanderson: Yes, I have been.

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL: Excellent, glad to hear that. They could do with your assistance over there at the moment. Half the cabinet, including the Treasurer, the health minister, the education minister, the police and emergency services minister, the child protection minister, the human services minister, the recreation, sport and racing minister and the mining and energy minister have not been there since the election. That is just not good enough.

We hear people saying, 'In their 16 years, Labor neglected regional South Australia.' That is just rubbish, and the people out in the regions know that because they saw us out there all the time. We did country cabinets and we made regular visits. We have the member for Narungga here, and I was quite often calling in to see his dad at the Country Times because I got out there and spoke to people who were involved in business, involved in farming and involved in tourism. I know that a lot of my cabinet colleagues were doing exactly the same thing. No-one believes you when you come in and say that.

We have the evidence here: answers back to my questions from ministers saying that in the 16 months they have been in government half the cabinet has not bothered to turn up to Kangaroo Island to see what is happening. I can tell you what is happening, and I said it in here the other day: tourism is falling through the floor over there because of the negligent attitude of the Minister for Tourism, who does not get it. He does not understand it. As I said the other day, some of you people sitting on the backbench should be putting your names forward to get onto the front bench because someone needs to look after it.

This is heartbreaking. As a bloke who spent five years building the visitor economy, from $4.9 billion a year to $6.8 billion a year, how do you reckon it feels to see this downward spiral where every quarter there is more and more money coming out of the visitor economy in terms of investment and there is more and more expenditure from people from interstate and overseas coming out of the visitor economy because people are not coming here?

Guess why they are not coming here? Because you are in a competitive environment and you need to advertise South Australia. You need to advertise all our regions to people here in South Australia, to people interstate and to people overseas. You need to be out there in that competitive environment, marketing the wonderful attributes, the wonderful natural features and the wonderful experiences you can have right here in South Australia.

What are we seeing from this government? We are seeing an $11 million reduction in funding to the South Australian Tourism Commission. That is $11 million they do not have to market South Australia. We are seeing the poor people down at the SATC literally pulling their hair out, asking, 'How can we do this job?' With an injection of funds from a Labor government, as I said, we took it from $4.9 billion up to $6.8 billion. There is a target there that by the end of next year the visitor economy in South Australia will be worth $8 billion. There is no way we are going to make that target if we keep going backwards by $100 million a quarter. You cannot go from $6.8 billion to $8 billion if you go backwards to $6.7 billion on the way, which is exactly what we saw in the last figures.

For people to come in here and say, 'We're great. We're out there in the regions. We're doing all this; we're pumping more money into tourism,' do not believe the spin, do not believe the spin of your minister because I do not think he actually understands. He will go down as one of the worst tourism ministers South Australia has ever had. That is a great pity. The 18,000 tourism operators in South Australia and the 40,000 people employed in the visitor economy around South Australia will have David Ridgway's elevation by the Premier of this state to tourism minister to blame for where the visitor economy is going in South Australia under his watch.

The people of Kangaroo Island, Aldinga, McLaren Vale, McLaren Flat, Willunga, Myponga, Yankalilla, Normanville, Rapid Bay, Second Valley, Cape Jervis, Delamere and Inman Valley deserve better than this government has put up. This is a government which lied to the South Australian people at the last election, which has come in here with a privatisation agenda, which has doubled the vehicle registration on Kangaroo Island and which has cut services, valuable services, to people right across this state. I think the Marshall Liberal government has defined itself over these past few months. People do not forget quickly.

As a community, we talk about the one-way expressway and the privatisation of ETSA as two of the greatest disasters in South Australian political history. People do not forget. People do not forget who was responsible for that, and now they are seeing a repetition of that. We saw the member for Finniss with the transport minister and the Liberal candidate for Mayo announcing a Victor Harbor road duplication to McLaren Vale. It does not start in this term. The work does not start for another four years. It is not even in the forward estimates. The people of McLaren Vale and the local area I represent want those upgrades now. There are people dying on the Victor Harbor road.

Mr Basham: So what were you doing for the last 16 years?

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL: I tell you what we were doing for the last 16 years: we were fixing your stupid one-way expressway. We had to duplicate it. There were 13 bridges that went across the Southern Expressway—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Mawson!

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL: —we had to take them all out—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Mawson, the best thing you can do is not respond to interjections. I will give you another 30 seconds because you were interrupted before. Interjections will cease, also. You have the call.

The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. We were replacing all those bridges across the Southern Expressway. Why? Because Diana Laidlaw, when she was transport minister, was told by the engineers, 'At least build the bridges across the Southern Expressway wide enough so that when a decent government, a proper, clear-thinking government, gets in they will be able to just lay down the other two or three lanes and duplicate it.' No, she said that everyone in the world was going to love this one-way expressway and was going to replicate it, so just keep the bridges narrow enough for the two or three lanes, depending where it is, and we will just keep that in place.

Guess what? We were the laughing-stock of the world. People would come down to my part of the world and do stories for international wine magazines and the first line would be: 'To get to McLaren Vale, you have to go down this stupid one-way expressway with traffic lights and a boom gate at the start and the end of it and it changes direction twice a day.' We fixed that. We put a rail line from Noarlunga down to Seaford. We electrified that rail line.

We went to the last election with money in the bank to duplicate Main South Road to the Victory Hotel and to build a new birth to year 12 school at Aldinga. That is what we did, and you are going to take four to five years to start work on the Victor Harbor road. You are a disgrace.

Time expired.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (17:44): My final remarks this week about the 2019-20 budget will centre on the South Australian Pathology service. I have previously stated that, as well as being very concerned about this aspect of public health, I have a family member employed within this vital service and over the years I have had a close working relationship with many health professionals across NALHN, CALHN and SALHN.

There is no doubt that South Australian pathology needs review and reform. I note that the PricewaterhouseCoopers report has identified changes to potentially save $100 million or more over three years. It is of great concern to all South Australians that poor leadership, inappropriate staffing and wasteful structuring have led to a drift in efficiency and cost effectiveness in the past decade, although it has not been apparent to me from stories I hear, and my observed commitment of staff I know, where or how this poor state of affairs has been allowed to exist or even come about.

Having said that, I am told inadequate IT and electronic bill processing systems are part of the dilemma, and a similar set of circumstances has been uncovered at the new RAH by KordaMentha. I am not sure how this could have occurred if IT especially had been up to date. This is not the first time we have learnt about IT being in need of update, and the now abandoned EPAS remains an issue the budget grapples with and an example of what must be done with new IT systems. To quote the minister:

…the very people who have to use the system—and the software provider—[must be consulted] the people with experience in making the system work.

Otherwise, we will see again hundreds of millions of dollars wasted. Let's hope SA Pathology will be considered as part of the SA Health digital strategy that I have heard about. Whatever else happens, we all want an efficient and effective public health service, and as we work to that end it is evident South Australian Pathology cannot be privatised. What must be retained and enhanced in the days of STEM and world-leading health research excellence in this state are the accredited training and research functions of this important healthcare organisation, important facets that cannot be replaced in the private sector.

Making efficiencies is one thing but as the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia has warned, poor diagnoses, and in the worst cases avoidable deaths, could result if SA Pathology is privatised. Evidence taken recently by a committee tells us a partly privatised state pathology service could end up costing more because commercial providers would only be interested in the parts that make money. I note from a quote in The Advertiser on 7 May by college president Bruce Latham:

If you transfer the stuff they want—and that's the community pathology, which requires very little manpower and is high frequency, you can make money off of it—all you're doing is making the rest of the business…cost more because you've got nothing to subsidise against…So cherry picking makes no sense at all.

Dr Latham also warned cutting training for young pathologists was a short-sighted cost-saving measure because the ageing workforce needs to be replenished. South Australian Pathology faces a $7.3 million efficiency target demanded in this year's budget period. Staff losses of up to 200 full-time equivalents in a workforce of 1,400 will have a big impact on those left behind. We hope among them will still be some of the best and brightest eager to continue to serve the state and its people, but it is really hard to see how a growing workload can be served by a significantly reduced workforce.

Other evidence presented to the committee, as reported in The Advertiser on 25 June, cited interstate Queensland consultant Selina Speer telling the committee that moves to privatise in that state in 2013 had been 'diabolical' and 'extraordinarily traumatic on a human level'. She likened removing pathology from public health services as ripping a hole in a knitted woollen jumper then trying to deal with the loose threads. Again, I quote her:

…otherwise the system starts to unravel. It can be done, but it takes a long time to tie off each cut thread. Being mindful of the value it gives to clinicians and its contribution to the sustainability of the health care system (outsourcing) doesn't make sense.

A final quote from The Advertiser editorial on 25 June states:

SA Pathology delivers vital services right across the state, from a wide range of complex diagnostic tests through to teaching, training and research.

Its crucial role in country health may not appeal to a private provider where profit as much as service delivery is a key motivation.

SA Pathology must continue to smarten up its act, but the looming review must ensure safety, standards and equity—not just cost—are key priorities.

There we see the importance of SA Pathology's contribution to country health being underlined. In closing, I would like to relate an anecdote from a local GP bemoaning the fact that he had to chase a simple blood test over several days, my point being that, if this is the case now, we really do have to be vigilant that things do not deteriorate in the chase for efficiencies.

A budget has to deliver services to people and the state, all over the state, with an eye to the future. Let's concentrate on doing our jobs here to the best of our ability and for the good of all. Let's tell the truth, warts and all, up-front and not bury nasty measures in budget papers that no-one can truly read or understand. Only then can we face our constituents and truly say we will look after them—the community, as well as the economy.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. A. Piccolo.