SA Health

Mr PICTON (Kaurna) (14:53): My question is to the Premier. Is it more important that ICAC delivers reports into maladministration and corruption or that some staff be protected from such ICAC reports that might be 'demoralising', in the words of the Premier?

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL (Dunstan—Premier) (14:53): I am not sure why the shadow minister hasn't really caught on. It's really up to the ICAC to determine for the Office for Public Integrity to receive the complaints and for the commissioner to determine how his resources are applied. We play no part in this whatsoever. I repeat that the commission is provided with adequate resources, relative to other jurisdictions in Australia. I was very interested—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: I was very interested—

The Hon. A. Piccolo interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Light is on two warnings.

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: The Leader of the Opposition says 'not according to the commissioner'. Let me tell you, the commissioner has had an increase in his budget since we came. So we have provided additional resources. The most recent budget provided for a further increase—

Dr Close interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Deputy leader!

The Hon. A. Piccolo: So the commissioner is wrong?

The SPEAKER: Member for Light!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: Let's be very clear: the ICAC receives around $15 million worth of funding per year. If we compare that to, for example, the largest state in Australia, New South Wales, that ICAC receives $27 million worth of funding per year. If it was on a pro rata basis, New South Wales should be on $65 million per year, rather than $27 million per year. The reality is we unequivocally believe that the ICAC is provided with an adequate budget each year, but it is not our job to prioritise that expenditure.