Address in Reply

Address in Reply

Adjourned debate on motion for adoption (resumed on motion).

Mr BASHAM (Finniss) (15:57): I would like to resume my remarks in relation to the Governor's address yesterday. It has been almost two years since the election of the Marshall Liberal government and much has been achieved. Communities in regional and rural areas, such as Finniss, which I am so privileged to represent, have benefited from a renewed focus, and we have seen things progress in my electorate, not directly always from government either.

One of the big things that I am very proud that this government has committed to do is to invest in the causeway to Granite Island. It is certainly one of the most important structures in Finniss itself. It has enormous history and an enormous tourist benefit. It operates a horse-drawn tram, which is only one of two in the world that still operate, carrying people across to the island. It is a fantastic icon of the South Coast and Victor Harbor in particular, and very much part of the Victor Harbor community.

The community certainly embraced the government's commitment to invest in a new causeway. I am disappointed that the old causeway is not repairable, but certainly understand that the connection is the bit of the heritage that we need to keep, so I am very pleased that this is progressing. I am also very pleased with the local investment following that announcement.

The Anchorage Hotel, which operates on the foreshore near the bowling club, has been there for many years. The current owners have owned it for about 17 or 18 years and they feel now that, with the investments happening in Victor Harbor around the causeway, it is the right time to invest in their business as well. They are looking to build 4½ star accommodation alongside the hotel and expand tourist opportunities on the Fleurieu Peninsula by allowing people to come and stay in a beautiful hotel looking over the ocean and enjoying the scenery and ambience.

An amazing part of the development is that they are going to put a bridge across the top of the railway line to a car park. That will allow people to stand and watch the steam trains actually go under them as they travel through and have the smoke of the steam train coming up past the glass walkway. They will get a very different experience of watching a steam train travel through the area.

We have also seen other great bits of funding. An important piece of investment in the area is in the surf lifesaving clubs. We have seen the opening of the Chiton Rocks development and their surf club. They are a very passionate group of people who operate in that area and who look after the people who swim at Chiton Rocks. It is very important that we look after that investment and give them the facilities they need to look after those lives.

Late last year, we saw the opening of the Goolwa Surf Lifesaving Club, another great venue. I would have to say that it is probably one of the best, most spectacular views of a surf beach you could find around Australia from up in that clubhouse looking out over Goolwa Beach. It is absolutely amazing; sitting there watching the world go by, you feel like you are part of the sandhills. We are also looking to see further investment in the surf lifesaving area with the development of the Port Elliot club at Horseshoe Bay. Hopefully that will continue and they will get the club revitalised. The sad thing for me is that I actually remember the previous one being built, which makes me start to feel very old. It is a great investment in the community.

Recently, there was also the announcement of some expenditure at the Goolwa Ambulance Station, another amazing bit of volunteer work that goes on. Goolwa station is a volunteer station, run just by volunteers, but it does more work than a lot of the paid stations, so something I am advocating that we need to look at further is whether we can actually get some paid staff in there as well because of the workload. However, it is a credit to those who volunteer in that region.

We have also seen investment in road infrastructure. The Goolwa Road and Alexandrina Road railway crossings have made them significantly safer for both the trains and for vehicles travelling along those roads. There are much clearer sight lines and light signals to make those crossings safer.

We are also seeing very significant investment from both the federal and the state governments into the duplication of the Victor Harbor Road from Old Noarlunga to McLaren Vale. That is not in my electorate, but it benefits my electorate enormously, as it is the main route most of the people who live in the electorate of Finniss use to get to Adelaide. It is an important safety necessity, as well as dealing with the congestion that occurs in that section, particularly on long weekends, etc. It is very much needed in that area.

Another piece of work that was one of the election commitments I went out with in my campaign to be member for Finniss is the investment in the roundabout at the Torrens and Crozier roads corner. Some preliminary works have started, and we have seen some undergrounding of powerlines, etc., but we are looking towards major work starting shortly. It is an important piece of infrastructure for the town. Particularly over the summer periods, when traffic volumes are high, it is very difficult to traverse across the two sides of the town with the traffic movements. This will give another opportunity for people to get across the town in a safer manner.

Last year, I had the privilege of having the Minister for Emergency Services visit the Lower Inman Valley CFS station to look at the works being done to improve their facilities. There was $30,000 put towards the apron at the front of their shed and other things to improve the facilities for the trucks and to make sure that they had safe ground to park vehicles on and work on them outside the sheds. It certainly improved it for those volunteers.

Another thing that I think was important in the area was the opening up of the reservoirs, as the member for Hammond mentioned in his remarks earlier. Opening Myponga for fishing and walking, which again is in a neighbouring electorate, is certainly part of the attraction for people to come and stay in areas around Finniss. To be able to enjoy time walking and fishing is certainly a great opportunity, and I think it is important that we have been able to make it available for those people.

Another piece of infrastructure investment I am extremely proud of is again one of my election commitments—that is, to help fund a Mount Compass recreation park. I was a student at the Mount Compass Area School in my primary school years, and when I was there the facilities in the town were very limited to enable children to enjoy playgrounds. The only playground in the town at that stage was at the school.

At that point, the school decided that it needed to invest, and it sought, through fundraising etc., and the local council and others, to invest in some very similar infrastructure to the Monash playground along the river. They put in a slippery dip and a few other very similar rides, and that gave, at least at the school, something for the children of the community to do. However, apart from that there has been very little in the Mount Compass area in the way of playgrounds available for the community. Mount Compass now has an amazing skate park, and I am very proud to have been part of getting it operational. I thank the Alexandrina Council for its investment in that park as well.

Going forward, I think there are many things that we need to keep working on. One that I am also very passionate about, and certainly have been a great advocate for in our party room, is the farm trespass laws and strengthening penalties for illegal invasions on farmers' properties. As a farmer, it certainly always worried me that someone might come onto my property, my home, and jeopardise my business and jeopardise my family just by protesting. They are there illegally.

I do everything I can as a farmer to make sure that I look after my livestock to the best of my ability and to make sure that their welfare is cared for at all times, but that does not stop them coming to protest because they do not necessarily agree with the farming practices of caring for animals. I think it is very important that we continue with that legislation.

Likewise, it is also important that we as a government continue to pursue rate capping and that as a government we continue to look at shop trading hours. Being a tourist destination, having deregulated trading hours in the township of Victor Harbor and through to Goolwa is something my community has enjoyed for probably 30 years plus. Shops can open when they like, and they do. Other shops choose to close when they like, and they do. It is up to local businesses to decide whether they want to open or not.

Another piece of important legislation is lifting the moratorium on GM crops. When I was in a dairy industry role as president of the South Australian Dairy Farmers Association, about 13 or 14 years ago, it came before us as an association: did we support GM or not? At that point in time, yes, we were very strongly supportive of it, and at that time we were subject to some very hostile reactions, including some very serious threats against comments that were made about GM crops.

Over that time, the science has very much come in favour of GM crops and how they can benefit the environment, the economy, the yields to farmers and the community generally. I think it is something we need to continue to pursue. I also think we have to continue with infrastructure projects that we have moved on. We need to keep spending on these projects to get our economy moving.

The Australian Space Agency is another great asset to our state. In working with the federal government in this space to see an improvement in what we can develop from this agency, there is so much we can learn from outside the atmosphere of the Earth. There are so many things we can achieve. I am very proud that South Australia hosts the Australian Space Agency.

Tourism is another sector that is essential to particularly the area of Finniss but South Australia generally. We have seen the importance of tourism highlighted with the bushfires in the Adelaide Hills and Kangaroo Island. The fires have put some businesses at risk of falling over due to the loss of business. It is very important that we remember it is not just the local businesses around KI and the Adelaide Hills that are affected but also businesses in other regions.

Businesses in Victor Harbor have had a downturn because international tourists would come to KI and then spend a few days in Victor as well. That has also been lost to a certain degree at this point in time. We need to make sure that we continue our focus on tourism, and I am very pleased that the Premier has taken tourism into his fold and is directing the importance of tourism to our state.

I also very much support the investment in drought support. As a farmer, it is very hard to manage the extremes of the climate and to suffer through those very dry years and get through to the other side. The beauty of getting through to the other side is you actually go from being in dust to being in mud. Going into mud is where farmers can make money. There is a saying, 'There is more money in mud than dust,' and that is very true. Hopefully, that is where we are heading this year and we have a great season moving forward, which will allow those farmers to rebuild their businesses with a great year.

We also need to make sure we keep an eye on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. In my national role as president of Australian Dairy Farmers, I was very conscious of the different views from one end of the river to the other. Certainly, when the plan came in, there was dissatisfaction from one end of the river to the other. They had totally different views of what they were unhappy about, but they were very unhappy about the plan generally. These were usually opposing views, which I felt meant that the plan was somewhere near where it needed to be, but I think we need to make sure that we keep everyone understanding that the plan is there to serve everyone along the river.

It is also important that we continue to work on biosecurity legislation reform in South Australia. We have seen it in other states, and I have certainly been involved in roles in the dairy industry with biosecurity reform and am pleased to assist the government in some of that space here as well to make sure that we get the right measures in place so that we do not put our industries at risk of biosecurity breakdowns.

Also important to the regional areas is the investment in the dog fence. It is a very historic fence that has worked well over many years protecting the sheep industry, particularly through the pastoral areas. It continues to do so, but it needs some reinvestment to make sure that it continues to achieve what it was originally built for.

There are many other things that I think are also important in the Governor's speech, such as the focus on the need to address environmental and renewable energy initiatives. The climate change strategy is to be released this year, which I think is an important part of where our government is heading. The Hydrogen Action Plan and electric vehicles are also important.

One of the stories in the media yesterday was about trying to reduce methane from livestock, which is equally important in making sure that we minimise our carbon footprint. There has been some work and research done, and I have had some conversations with those involved, understanding where it might fit with the dairy industry in particular, around the use of a particular type of seaweed that will actually reduce the emissions of methane from cattle. Methane is a greenhouse gas, and if we can reduce those emissions it will certainly be a great thing and help us reach our target of reducing emissions by 50 per cent by 2030.

The Home Battery Scheme is another wonderful initiative by the Marshall Liberal government to support people putting batteries on their solar systems, etc. Another piece of important legislation that was passed late last year is the Landscape South Australia legislation and the reforms it will put in place around natural resources management to bring that back to local focus.

Farmers and other community members have always felt they are the best people to look after their local community. As a former farmer, I know that it was my responsibility to look after my patch, which included the roadsides and working on those to make sure that blackberries were minimised, that other noxious weeds were dealt with and that feral animals that caused issues for native species as well as livestock were managed.

There are many responsibilities of a landowner. Again, from a very local approach, the frustration is then having the neighbour who does nothing. When you have a centralised system, it is very hard to convince the system that that one neighbour is risking a very large proportion of the community. To bring it back to the local area is very important.

Another important part of the government's investment is the Heysen Trail from Deep Creek through to Granite Island. The money is going towards improving that trail and encouraging people to walk that beautiful coastline. I think that is another amazing investment in our tourism sector.

Education is also very important, and there are many things that can be done in education. As a former member of an independent school board that had R-12 under its management, one of the best things I have seen is the movement of year 7 into the secondary school right across the state. It is a fantastic move.

I saw the benefit at the school that I was on the board of, having done that prior to the state moving to that position. The benefit to those year 7s in moving into the secondary school structure and having access to the science labs, etc., is very important for their education. It is also wonderful to see the internet investment in schools in the partnership with Telstra. It has been very important in my community to see many schools go from very average connectivity to very good connectivity. Getting access to those schools is very important.

There are many other things that also have an effect on my community. Homelessness is not something that people see as part of the area of the South Coast. Homelessness is something that affects many regions, if not all regions, but you have to look a bit deeper sometimes to find it. The coastline from Goolwa to Victor, particularly during the winter months, is a very popular place for the homeless to come to because it has a slightly milder climate. They feel they can get a nicer place to stay out in the sheltered areas of parks, etc., in the areas of Victor to Goolwa during those months. It is something that we have to be very conscious of, and we need to work to minimise the number of people out there.

That is something I learnt back in the early 2000s when I was privileged enough to work on a course that I was doing on the homeless in Sydney. Talking to some of the homeless in Sydney, some were choosing to be there for many different reasons. One businessman was choosing to live in his car so that he could save for a deposit to buy a house. There were others who had been homeless in other parts of the world and felt that Sydney was one of the best places in the world to be homeless, which seems a very strange conversation to be having—that you could be a world traveller and still choose to be homeless. It is something we need to continue to work on.

We also need to look at some of the issues around health. We have certainly seen a focus in the city around health, but I very much would like to see renewed focus in the regions on some of the health challenges. The South Coast District Hospital is very dear to my heart. I was born there 51½ years ago, and my father was born there 70-odd years ago. I have seen it transform into a service with long queues, going from the days when the local GPs serviced that hospital and did a fantastic job in doing so. Sadly, we have lost that. We now have a very good service, but it takes a lot longer to be seen. Sometimes it does not have the resources to see everyone in the community. For example, children are unable to be admitted into the South Coast District Hospital because of the qualifications of those on staff.

Our state is very much at the cusp of a remarkable transformation, and we see many things being invested in in our community. I am very proud to be part of the Marshall Liberal government working to make those changes. However, there are many challenges. We have seen the challenges of the bushfires. We see the challenges of many other events as well. Those challenges keep popping up. As a community, we do a wonderful job of coping with those challenges.

I would like to thank all those who have put up their hand to help with the bushfires and support the communities. It has certainly been part of our community all my lifetime and right through many other years in this great country of ours. No matter how big or small the fire is, there is always someone who will come to help. Likewise, floods or any other natural disaster just brings out that goodwill of our country. Thank you very much to those people, and I very much look forward to the opportunity and challenges that face the government and working for the next two years—and hopefully longer—to support a wonderful country and our beautiful state of South Australia.

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (16:24): I rise to make a reply to the Governor's speech of yesterday, but before I talk about my two portfolios I would like to talk about the importance of the conduct of members of parliament, and the importance of demonstrating leadership in that context.

We have in the last couple of days witnessed attempts by the opposition to understand clearly what occurred in December, what the investigation that is looking into those events looks like and what the leadership will be from the Premier, and none of those have been answered in any way satisfactorily. It is not the opposition that needs to know this alone: the opposition asks on behalf of the public of South Australia. That is what this chamber is for. That is what we all tell our school students when they come in and we do the school tours. We explain to them that one of the reasons we have this chamber and one of the reasons we have question time is that there must be accountability on the side of politics that is in government at the time, and that accountability thus far on this matter is completely absent.

What I want to say is that everyone in South Australia has some sense of what occurred because of the stream of media stories that have covered the stream of allegations, because there has been an apology made in public in this chamber and because there has been some action—although very patchy—to have the member be removed from some of the committees that he has been on.

What South Australia sees is that the behaviour that they are hearing described is okay—it is not great, they are not delighted by it on the other side, but they are not prepared to actually do anything about it. They are not prepared to name what it is that is so-called ‘unacceptable’ that was apologised for, and they are not prepared to say that that specific behaviour is unacceptable in the workplace and out of the workplace.

While we have politicians who are prepared to protect and cover up that kind of behaviour we do the entire public of South Australia a disservice, because they watch us, and they watch us already with suspicion and concern, and when they see this protection racket, when they see that absence of leadership, that absence of setting decent standards that they themselves in the public feel they have to stand up to, they are let down, and do not anyone in this chamber think that that is going to be forgotten in a hurry.

I want now to talk in response to the Governor's speech about the two portfolios for which I have responsibility. The first one is education, and it was in some ways quite delightful to hear how the projects that we started in government—some started when I was the minister, some started earlier, all supported by the full cabinet—are going, because the vast majority of the updates on the progress and the achievements two years in are ours.

It is great to hear that some of the physical infrastructure projects are coming along nicely. That is terrific. It would be nice if the local Labor members were allowed to attend and, perhaps, open some of the facilities that had been decided on, prioritised, by the previous Labor government, but we accept that that might not be in the generous heart of the government, but it is good to hear that they are going well.

It was good to hear about the Phonics Assessment, which I initiated, not the government—the government followed, fantastic, good on you—and I did that despite the opposition of, I think, every other state if not nearly all the other states, but credit is not something that this government likes to share.

It is terrific to hear how the internet project is going, something that I think was announced at the end of 2017 or the beginning of 2018. It was set aside in the budget, knowing that there would be more money coming in from the federal government in the negotiations that were occurring over their very poor version of Gonski, and to have that be frequently updated for us by the Minister for Education in the government questions is terrific because I think it is a great idea because I was part of deciding that this state should do that. The lack of credit is something I am simply getting used to unfortunately.

The only real difference in what the government is doing on education in comparison with what the Labor government is doing on education—and I am very grateful that they are continuing those projects; even though they are claiming them for their own, I would rather they did that than cut them off for the sake of the schools—is, of course, the move of year 7. I have always been very clear that, while I did not see it as a priority because there is no educational advantage, there is absolutely no research that says there is any educational advantage, and it is expensive, I had always said if they want to do it and they win government then I certainly will not be disentangling it. I would not waste everybody's time and more money disentangling it.

I note that there is some worrying evidence that more disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, students from families where life is tougher, can struggle more going from a primary environment to a secondary environment that year earlier. There is some evidence that the rate of attendance for year 7s drops back a bit for those students as they become more enmeshed in the adolescent world earlier than they would otherwise have done. That troubles me and that will be my focus of attention when we return to government to make sure that those students are being supported in every way possible in this new regime.

I must say that I am concerned about the infrastructure associated and very concerned that the Institute of Architects had to come out and say that they thought these projects would not be ready in time and that therefore it might well be that we find year 7s sitting in libraries or gymnasiums having classes because their classrooms are not ready. I am concerned that transportables yet again are being seen as a solution to the problem.

I remain very disappointed that there are so many high schools that would have had money under the Building Better Schools arrangements for upgrading their facilities, for having new specialist facilities, that are now having that money diverted to build classrooms for 12 year olds who are currently in classrooms down the road. We will be watching very clearly what happens with the unfolding of the infrastructure for year 7.

The news this morning about the TAFE cuts came as no surprise; it is starting to go public. We had already seen the closures of campuses. What I have been hearing for the last year is the way that the TAFE cuts now are being managed is really going to do damage to the quality of the offering. There is an awful lot of rhetoric that comes from the other side and, again, an awful lot of taking credit for the result of actions taken towards the end of the last government to resolve quality difficulties in TAFE.

There is a lot of credit taken. The previous government is always blamed for things that happened after the election if they are not good but never credited for actions that get better as a result of decisions taken. I guess that is politics, but I will be watching very carefully as we start to see through the rhetoric to see the reality for TAFE, to see the reality of perhaps more campus closures, as was canvassed in the paper this morning.

But even more likely, even more certain, is the removal of swathes of lecturers, the replacement of permanent positions with people who simply turn up, teach for an hour and go away again and who are not there for the ongoing support and development of the students. I think this will be a very serious concern as we see our economy tilt more and more to requiring young people to have finished high school and be able to go on to further education. If we undermine the public provider, if we residualise the public provider in our haste to make sure that private providers are accommodated, we will pay the price.

I suppose few people listen to these speeches, but I would like to put on record my absolute admiration for, and thanks to, the teachers in this state. As people would know, because each year I talk about my own children, we are drifting towards the end of the high school experience. We all have our own experiences with the education system, but, having gone through the public system from the beginning and now coming towards the end, I can say that our public schools are excellent.

My children are not at one of the public schools that people fight to get into or at one of the schools that are regarded as elite or as one of the privileged public schools. These also are excellent schools. They are at a suburban public school and it is excellent. The way my children are supported, the range of education that is offered to them, the quality of support and the quality of being stretched and stimulated have been superb. I want people to realise that they do not have to leave the public sector to have an excellent education.

I turn to the environment. There are so many overwhelming challenges that we face in the environment. I liked a lot of the rhetoric in the Governor's speech—I will say that. I liked the fact that the environment featured very prominently. I wish I had more confidence that the funding and the leadership would follow, but I did like that there was a recognition of the importance of the environment. Climate change is a big steam train coming down the tracks to get us all if we do not collectively, as a world, as a nation and as a community, do something.

That 'do something' has become highly complex because it must be about reducing emissions and it must be about engaging in the global effort to persuade everyone that they must reduce their emissions. They must do it in a way that allows development but that leapfrogs the old technology, the dirty technology, and leapfrogs into the technology that is cheap, that is green and that is renewable.

However, I wonder if this government in any way remonstrated with the Prime Minister when, in the middle of Australia burning, his government went to Madrid and did everything they could to dismantle a global agreement on increasing the emissions reduction. I would like to know if this government privately—and they could possibly never say it—at any point lifted up the phone and said, 'This is the wrong direction for this nation.' I wish I had any confidence that that could have happened.

I know what did happen in the first budget under this government: $11 million was taken out of the Department for Environment and Water in the climate change area; $11 million was just removed. While we hear the rhetoric about climate change, where is the action? Where is the on-ground policy work that needs to be done in that department to make sure that we respond?

In that context, which must be the context in which we think of almost everything now, we must be very concerned about the future of the River Murray—and I am desperately concerned. Yesterday, I did a grievance at top speed, which possibly needs some translation because I think I got faster as I kept talking. There is a pathway for us to get this 450 gigalitres, but it is going to take some action, some pretty loud action.

This government must put pressure on the commonwealth to do a series of actions. First of all, it needs to lift the cap on buybacks so that it is possible for voluntary buybacks to occur. Barnaby Joyce, our old friend Barnaby Joyce, thinks that every drop of water that goes over the border to South Australia is a waste. I have heard the Premier and the minister, when the royal commission report first came out a year ago, be very dismissive of the power of buybacks. In fact, they did not seem to think that they were voluntary, which of course they are: that is what is in the Water Act and that is what was in the royal commission report.

More recently, the Minister for Environment has been starting to echo some of what I have been saying for the last two years and what the royal commission said a year ago, which is that we need to be able to use buybacks to make sure that we get the water we need down the river. One of the problems with the buybacks is that there is a cap and there are only 100 gigalitres or 200 gigalitres left in that cap. That must be lifted. That is in the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. The commonwealth needs to change the way that Barnaby put it in in the first place.

The next thing they need to do is change the plan for the 450 gigalitres. At the moment, it can only be done with water efficiency projects. Bafflingly, the other states, particularly New South Wales, which has gone completely out into the public saying, 'We will not be doing that,' are refusing to put forward any water efficiency projects, even under the overly complex criteria that the minister agreed to more than a year ago.

We need to change the Murray-Darling Basin Plan to allow voluntary buybacks to be the way the 450 gigalitres is delivered because then you might not even have to do the buybacks because, by changing that, it changes the equation for New South Wales and Victoria. Rhetoric here means nothing. 'Maybe the commonwealth should do some buybacks,' I am hearing now. They cannot for the 450 gigalitres. Did that come up at the ministerial council meeting? Was that discussed? It is not in the communiqué. Was that discussed as being a reasonable response to New South Wales, saying before, during and after that meeting that it will not be contributing any of the 450 gigalitres?

Let's be really clear. I know they are in drought. I am not asking them to send water now. I am asking them to send entitlements to let the government put in water efficiency infrastructure for when the water returns after the drought and give up entitlements that then become the entitlements of the health of the River Murray. That can only be done with water efficiency projects at the moment. They do not want to do them.

Here is one way to put serious pressure on them. Do we ever hear about this from the government or from the federal government? Nothing. The federal government writes a strict letter to the minister in New South Wales about another issue. It is not about our issue but about the Northern Basin Plan and the water management plans. What about our issue? That 450 gigalitres is not discretionary. It is essential if we are to have a healthy river.

I wish to note in passing that I and the Labor Party support the intent of the waste strategy that the minister has been talking about and that was repeated in the Governor's speech yesterday. I am undertaking consultation. I trust that the minister will allow time before rushing the legislation through this chamber for me to do that, but I want to make sure that we have the right tone, the right response to this challenge in that legislation, the right provisions and the right punishment, should people and companies go against the legislation. But, in terms of intent, I am with the government on that, and I look forward to seeing it come into this chamber in due course.

I want to turn to the other really big issue we are facing that climate change is sitting over the top of and that is the state of our natural environment, which is in trouble even if climate change were not happening. It is in trouble because of the change of land use, the way in which for the last several generations our population—and I am not talking about our population alone but the world's population—has been growing and the way in which we are increasing demands on the natural environment.

Biodiversity was already under strain. Add climate change to that and add one of the consequences of climate change being what we saw on Kangaroo Island, in the Adelaide Hills, on Yorke Peninsula and what we are still seeing in the Eastern States—that is, fire destroying huge areas of land and at a temperature and at a ferocity that are almost unheralded. I find it hard to talk about this because the last two times I tried to talk about Kangaroo Island publicly I got very moved, so I will try to talk about this in a calm way.

What I saw on Kangaroo Island was utter devastation. When I spent time with ecologists who love that park, who care for that park and have done for years, they were very concerned that the rate of regeneration will be significantly less than any fire we have seen before because the temperature was so great and the speed was so great. Animals were unable to get out of the way. The fire burnt down into the earth where dunnart nests are, for example. The stench of death when you go to Flinders Chase now is horrifying, and I am sure that the Deputy Premier experienced this.

How that regeneration works is going to be closely watched by ecologists because, if those seeds are not able to germinate because the temperatures have killed what is inside, if those trees cannot sprout—and I saw some beautiful sprouting from the 20 December fire but not that January fire—if there is a diminution of the rate of regeneration, then we are in significant trouble, and we are at only 1º of warming right now. This is a warning to us.

The reason I went down to Kangaroo Island in October last year and spent time with the same people, in different circumstances, I spent time with a couple of weeks ago was to walk the Wilderness Trail to look at the spots the government has deemed appropriate for development for accommodation sites for people to come in and spend up to $1,000 a night. There will be clearance of native vegetation to facilitate accommodation sitting on top of bluffs, visible from very many points of the Wilderness Trail, near beaches where there are nesting hooded plovers, which are very sensitive animals.

My goodness, Australian fauna are one of the most specialised kinds of fauna, where they will only nest in a very narrow environment, where they will only feed from a narrow set of available feed. It makes them highly vulnerable to the kinds of disruptive changes we are seeing at the moment. When I walked around there, I was more convinced than ever that the Friends group was right to say, 'We are withdrawing our labour. We can't work on this park when what this park is doing is facilitating yet another hit to biodiversity for the sake of having some people come in and have a comfortable environment to sleep in, to eat and to have drinks with a beautiful view.' That is nice, but at what expense?

Those people are facing the burnout of that environment. The minister and his department are going to need every volunteer they can get so that collectively they are able to do all the restoration possible. The seed collection some of these environmentalists have been able to do over the last few years may be one of the most precious resources on the island for the regeneration of that natural environment. The labour they are capable of bringing, with knowledge and understanding of what should go where, of the interactions between different species, will be invaluable.

In exchange for understanding the importance of that local community to the restoration of that park, the government should take this opportunity to reconsider the support for that development. As I understand it, almost the first words out of the environment department—presumably on directive—were that the development is still going ahead. Well, the environment is very different now. The trail is burnt. We do not yet know, until there has been proper ecological assessment, which bits are more vulnerable, which bits have some chance of regeneration easily and which bits are fragile and will require more work.

All of that must come first. I am tired of the natural environment being seen as something that can be compromised for other interests. We cannot survive unless the natural environment is robust, sustainable and generating all the kinds of activities that every landholder knows are important. After my maiden speech, everyone was very lovely and very welcoming, but some of the people on the then opposition side who were landholders came over and thanked me because of the way I talked about the importance of the environment to landholders and the importance of landholders to the environment, that really good farming nowadays is environmental farming that understands the importance of the ecological systems being attacked enough to keep the system working.

We have to give that same respect to our national parks. We cannot assume that we can keep putting developments in Flinders Chase and making it pay the price. Now that we have one of Australia's 15 biodiversity hotspots, which is what Flinders Chase was, desperate for help—and, incidentally, Kangaroo Island tourism is dependent in very large part on that natural experience that tourists crave and want—we must prioritise it. The minister must sit down with the Friends, talk to them, listen to them and understand what is possible in Flinders Chase.

They have never said they do not want any development. They have never said that. I suspect some of them probably do not, but they have made a decision that that is not what their position will be. They have made the decision that they will support development in Flinders Chase; they just want it to be in a place that does not do additional harm. I urge the minister to listen: they are very lovely people, very reasonable and they know a huge amount about the environment.

I was standing with a couple in the ruins of their house—again, the Deputy Premier amongst others will have seen these collapsed homes where all you can see is the roof and then bits of possessions peeking from underneath—but as we were standing and talking and feeling awful, they were recognising the species of birds that were flitting by. Their knowledge and understanding of the ecology, and their care for it, is remarkable. If the minister would sit down and talk to them and understand why they have these objections, invite them to come back and help restore the park, but on the basis that the park will not be the plaything for development, that development will be consistent with the demands of the park, then I think we might see some progress.

I am happy to give full credit if that happens. I would rather see Flinders Chase looked after and the environment cared for as it slowly starts, we hope, to regenerate than continue to have the easy points, the easy wins every time I talk about the minister's record on Facebook and elsewhere.

There was some nice rhetoric in the speech, some nice updates on Labor projects—I appreciated those and am glad to see they are going well and would love to be invited to a few openings but do not expect it—some warning signals about year 7, some warning signals about the priority given to disadvantaged students, and a very big concern that we need to go beyond rhetoric with climate change and with the Murray River and our national parks, and start taking action.

Mr SZAKACS (Cheltenham) (16:52): It is my pleasure to rise to make a brief contribution to the Address in Reply. I took some time over the Christmas break, while this parliament was prorogued, to catch up on some bad movies. One of my favourite bad movies is Groundhog Day which is always—

The Hon. V.A. Chapman: It's a great movie.

Mr SZAKACS: It is a great movie and one of my favourites, in fact. It is my favourite Christmas movie, and I had the pleasure of watching it probably half a dozen times and am starting to introduce my four-year-old son to it. It is probably at about his level of humour as well. Groundhog Day is a bit of a joke that we make from time to time. We all suffer from a sense of deja vu from week to week, month to month, especially as we spend more time in this place.

However, I must say, having the privilege of listening to His Excellency address the joint sitting on the opening of this new session of parliament, Bill Murray and Groundhog Day came strikingly back to me because in merely the first few paragraphs of His Excellency's contribution on behalf of this Marshall Liberal government we heard about the bold new agenda that this parliament was prorogued to pursue: the inconvenience, the cost of what is not a usual course of action, to prorogue and open this new session.

We heard about the pledge, the pledge that is now effectively torn up, and the social contract that has been broken with the public of South Australia: more jobs, better services and lower costs. We heard in those first few paragraphs of the government's agenda for this new session of parliament that magic initiative, that magic new vision that we are about to see this year: shop trading hours, rate capping and abolishing and amending labour hire laws—something that this government attempted dismally to convince the public of throughout 2019. They failed to convince the public, they failed to convince South Australians, they failed to convince us in the Labor opposition and of course they failed to convince the honourable members of the other place.

So I ask: what is the purpose of us being here to launch this bold, new agenda when, front and centre, is rehashing the past, waking up to that alarm clock at 6am as Bill Murray did, morning after morning? We are here again. I am not sure what new arguments the government are going to proffer to the public in this regard.

I have met the Deputy Premier, both as a member of this place and also in my former role as the secretary of SA Unions, about labour hire for years now. To the Deputy Premier's credit, her views around this are clear, but she fails to articulate why we are back here again with a further attempt to scrap laws, to change laws that were instigated by the former Labor government with the sole purpose of protecting some of the most vulnerable workers in our community.

I now move to the pledge of more jobs, better services and lower costs. I was interested to hear His Excellency talk in a little bit more detail about this new initiative from this government. What was not discussed in His Excellency's contribution was GlobeLink. I have spoken with a number of my constituents, a number of business leaders, over the last couple of weeks since the Premier's backflip in respect of GlobeLink, and the response has been interesting. What strikes me is that most constituents I speak to never had a single expectation that this project was going to take place. The opinion of industry leaders all the way from Adelaide Airport to freight and road, and peak councils, was very clear: this was a bad thing for the state.

The spin around this has been interesting, but the undeniable facts of this matter are clear. Either the Premier had no intention of proceeding with this project, it was political opportunism of the highest order and the intention was always, midterm, to inform the public, 'Nothing to see here,' and we can believe that, we can believe that this was all cooked, we can believe that this was all confected, or we can turn our mind to the only viable alternative, which is that the economic literacy of the Premier is so poor that, when announcing this project and intention around GlobeLink, the net impact on this state was not even considered.

He did not speak to peak bodies. He did not speak to freight and road councils. It was a great idea probably cooked up at a Liberal love-in somewhere and here we are a couple of years later. Frankly, this undermines the public's faith in politicians on both sides of this house. We have a duty to the state and we have a duty to the community to do what we say and say what we mean. When the government, this Marshall Liberal government, continually backflip and live in a world of post truth, we undermine the very integrity of this place to which we are elected to serve.

There is also a fundamental disconnect by the government when it comes to jobs and what is going to get us to an economy that is able to be futureproofed. There is also an utter lack of narrative around the nature of work. Our community is doing it really tough, and my community in Cheltenham is doing it as tough if not tougher than others. Wage growth continues to be at record lows, people are working longer hours for less pay and wage theft is now becoming a business practice for far too many dodgy enterprises that undercut the vast majority of legitimate, hardworking, lawful businesses around this state.

This government has failed to articulate their vision for work. Work is changing. Work has been changing for a decade or more now. To simply talk about jobs as a catchphrase fails to have regard for the stress and anxiety that are facing working people across this state. Where is their next job going to come from? How are they going to pay the bills at the end of the week? What is the future for their children who are currently in school or who are currently in training for the future?

We hear a lot of rhetoric from different talking heads about this concept that the job that many of our children may be doing one day does not even exist yet, and I even speak about that myself. My four-year-old son, who started school for the first time this year, is likely to be working in a job that looks entirely different from what it may look like today.

It is incumbent upon governments to take a broad and brave stand about what they believe work should look like. It is not enough just to talk about a job or employment or, sadly, as this government continues to have to talk about, unemployment as it continues to rise in this state. It is about taking a stand and articulating what work should look like in a vision that we as elected leaders will pursue. Of course, the nature of work, when you get it wrong, has a dramatic flow-on effect for the rest of the economy.

For the last two years, we have seen a net decline in the share of household income that is disposable. The amount of disposable income that a household has is declining. What I put is something that should worry us all—that is, the very real prospect that we will be the first generation to hand over workplaces, to hand over work and to hand over jobs that are worse, that are lower paid and that are less secure than those of the generation before us. That is not okay. Every person in this house, irrespective of our politics and our political persuasion, should be very concerned about that prospect.

When disposable income dips, it means quite simply that people have less to spend in our economy. Very few of the thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of working people with whom I have had the privilege to work and meet over my professional career are what we would determine as having high net wealth.

These are not people who have a Cayman Islands offshore bank account. These are not people who have a large share portfolio. Some of them are lucky enough, thanks to their trade union, to have industry superannuation. These are people who earn money, spend it to look after their family and do their best in whatever way they can to provide a better life for them than, potentially, the one they had when they were growing up.

As we see retail spending decline, as we see whole rafts of industry shut their doors and close up shop, we have to ask ourselves: is it simply enough anymore to sit back and watch wages decline and the security of work dampen whilst this government is simply asleep at the wheel? One thing we know that creates better work, more secure jobs and better economic security for people is access to education, training and skills.

There are many things that my colleagues have spoken about and will speak about during their contribution to this Address in Reply, but there are two issues that I want to speak about specifically. One is the art of failure by this government and the Minister for Innovation and Skills to draw a causal and cogent link between training and skills and better work. We have heard a lot, as we did in His Excellency's contribution in the joint sitting, about the increasing numbers projected and the targets of this government around apprenticeships.

What His Excellency, on advice from the Premier, failed to inform the joint sitting of was the fact that the 20,000 over five years that the minister continually trots out can count in those numbers a course as short as four weeks, two weeks or even one week. I have made my contribution on this previously, but those four-week, two-week, one-week pre-voc courses, introductory courses or foundation courses play a really important role in the training system. What they do not do is provide a pathway to a job. That is where this minister continues to fail this generation and upcoming generations of young South Australians.

The training in school system was and is set up to provide a pathway for good work, for meaningful jobs, for transferability and for economic security for young people. When I meet with businesses both in my electorate and around Adelaide to discuss what they need from young people entering training and skills, it is very clear and very stark. In the western suburbs of Adelaide in particular, I and my fellow western suburbs MPs, including the member for Port Adelaide and the member for Lee, are being asked: when is the western Adelaide technical college going to be delivered? I am sure the member for Colton is having the same question asked of him.

In February 2018, the then Liberal opposition announced its policy of a western Adelaide technical college, an initiative that, at the time and before I was even elected to this place, I thought was a net positive contribution to our city and to the emerging narrative around training and skills. In July 2019, here in estimates the Minister for Education, in response to a question from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, said that the announcement was imminent.

Any of us who have worked in politics or in public life know that the wheels of the bureaucracy turn very slowly at times, but I think that by any reasonable measure an imminent announcement now some eight months later from that answer would indicate that the people of western Adelaide are rightfully cynical, and they are cynical about this government's utter contempt for our community. At the same time that buses are being cut, at the same time that major rail is at threat through the western suburbs of Adelaide, at the very same time that buses along Grange Road along my electorate and that of the member for Lee are being cut we are still awaiting a major pillar of this now government's election platform.

Further interrogation of the Minister for Education during the last session of parliament confirmed that the minister would not rule out this technical college being fee pay. We need to know more about this. The western suburbs of Adelaide, the young people, the young students who stand to benefit from this investment and contribution of a tailored, broad-based technical college, deserve the answers. Frankly, what is going to happen is that a young person is going to see their passage through high school, waiting, waiting, waiting for this technical college and it will pass them by. We need those answers and we need them now. Any relaunch of this government's agenda that does not include an announcement now about that fails those young jobseekers in the western suburbs of Adelaide.

One thing that I guess solidifies this for me, and the need for us to distil down exactly what it is that this government intends to do to improve the nature of work, to improve wages and to better secure employment for our young people is the graduation ceremonies that I attended throughout the end of 2019 for the number of schools in my electorate. As is often the case, and I am sure in schools in the areas of my colleagues, we are continually floored by how impressive our young transitioning students into high school are. I think we all look back from time to time, and I feel that I never had my head switched on as a 12, 13 year old as kids do these days.

There are a few things that struck me and that really floored me. One that really did was the number of young female students who, when they addressed their assemblies and graduation ceremonies, spoke about what they wanted to do in the future. I lost count of how many of them said that they wanted to be AFL footballers. When I look back not all that long ago, I cannot imagine a young girl being able to get up and say, 'I want to be a footballer.' I am so proud of that, and I know that my colleagues in this place would be, too.

Another thing that was far more sobering was the number of students who got up as 12 and 13 year olds and spoke about what they wanted to do in the future—whilst their schoolmates were talking about being footy players, about being astronauts, about being YouTubers (I did not even know what a YouTuber was until I went to a couple of year 7 graduations)—and the number of graduating year 7 and year 6 students who spoke about their desire to get a job and look after their family.

It should sober us all because no 12 or 13 year old should be spending their time at school in year 6 or year 7 worried about where their job is going to come from when they need to enter the workforce—no-one. If that is what we are leaving this generation, then we have failed. This government needs now to step up and articulate what their vision is for when that young person who is 12 or 13 enters the workforce. No-one at that age should already suffer the anxieties of an adult when it comes to finding work—no-one.

Another thing that has really sobered me over this last period is reflecting on this government's commitment to better services and lower costs. Quietly, on 1 January, patients and families in my local area turned up at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woodville and saw hastily stuck corrections to parking fees, which dramatically increased parking fees for those families. Due to some family illness, my own family is spending a considerable amount of time at The QEH at the moment and it has given me pause to reflect on the difficulties that families that are seeing themselves in care or in treatment on a regular basis are facing when they attend a hospital.

The difficulties in finding a car park at The QEH are already well known. One of the excellent contributions that the former Labor government made to that hospital—the hospital that I was born at, I must also say, as were a number of people in this house—was the multistorey car park. That was an important initiative that was funded by the then Labor government. I drove through that car park just a couple of days ago and it was empty, while the secondary car park at The QEH was overflowing and had cars circling.

It is very clear that there is a need for additional car parking spaces, but the difference is that the increase in costs to that car park for families and patients is dramatic and people are voting with their feet. They are not parking there. This brand spanking new car park is effectively mothballed because of the excessive costs of parking for those western suburbs families.

I invite the Minister for Health in the other place to come down to the hospital with me sometime and spend a little bit of time there—not to walk around waiting for a press conference, not to stand out on the grassed area, but to see the stress on families' faces as that compounds as they are looking for a car park, as they then have to make the decision about the additional car parking costs and whether that day, whilst their loved one or family member is seeking care in the hospital, they can afford that coffee, or whether they can grab that sandwich for lunch. These are the very real considerations that members of my community make every day thanks to the broken promises of this Liberal government.

In closing, I think our communities watch us in this place far more than we give them credit for. They might not be sitting at home now watching this live stream but they look to us to uphold a standard of integrity and honesty. When a government of any political persuasion speaks so unequivocally of more jobs, better services and lower costs, they have every right to believe that, and every time a government breaks those promises, every time a government runs away from truth, honesty, integrity and accountability, it undermines the job that we are put here to do. I look forward to this year, and I expect and I hope from this bold new agenda that the government speaks about that we are going to see a little bit more than we have in the last couple of days.

Mr MURRAY (Davenport) (17:20): I rise to make some brief and rather poorly scripted comments in response to His Excellency the Governor's address to us collectively. The address made by the Governor essentially sets out the proposed legislative program for this coming session. I want to start by recapping from the perspective of my own electorate of Davenport some of the things that this government has delivered for my community. That is the litmus test in many respects for the people who elected me to represent them here. We made a series of promises and I want to give some consideration by way of looking back and then look forward at some of the developments that the legislative program so described will in fact generate for my constituents.

In my view, possibly one of the biggest single developments in my community has been the recent announcement at the end of last year of the Southern Health Expansion Plan, which constitutes an $86 million spend, the employment of 45 full-time equivalent clinical specialists, nurses, doctors, etc., and the addition of 30 emergency treatment beds to Flinders, taking Flinders from 53 beds or treatment places to 83, and in so doing making the Flinders emergency department the biggest in South Australia. Today, we have had a lot of talk from the other side about promises, and I want to recap very clearly the situation with health services in the south of Adelaide.

There were unequivocal promises made prior to the advent of Transforming Health. Those promises included the fact that the Repat Hospital would never be closed. It is now history of course that it was closed, and that is and remains a major issue for the people in the south. Less widely known was the concurrent gutting of services and capacity at Noarlunga Hospital. Neither Noarlunga Hospital nor the Repat hospital are in my electorate. Their closure in the case of the Repat or their semi destruction in the case of the services and capabilities offered down at Noarlunga meant an inordinate load being placed on the Flinders hospital, in particular its emergency department, and in particular the people who work there. Many of the people who work at Flinders are my constituents.

The reality at Flinders as a result of these changes can be best summarised as follows: the Flinders emergency department experienced in 2011 some 60-odd thousand emergency admissions during the course of that year—60,000 in 2011. The current facility is designed to cater for 70,000. In 2011, there were 60,000 people going through a facility to handle 70,000, which is not a huge issue. Midway through 2019, the number of emergency presentations at Flinders was 92,000 in a facility designed to handle 70,000. I invite you to consider what may have caused that.

If you speak to the people who work there, they will tell you that the answer is the fact that the capacity previously provided by the Repat and, in particular, by Noarlunga meant that Flinders was inundated. This government has committed to start to address that problem with Flinders in particular, and it will start this year. This government will start to correct some of the impact on my community made by the changes to, and deleterious vandalism of, our health system under the auspices of Transforming Health, not to mention the complete, abject and unapologetic breach of the trust of the South Australian community that the closure of the Repat represents.

To recap, an enormous amount of money will be spent in my electorate of Davenport as part of this program. The program will first and foremost enable the recommitment and re-establishment of capacity at Noarlunga Hospital. This will mean, from a practical perspective, that people will be able to receive treatment at Noarlunga, as opposed to the current situation whereby patients have to be transported by ambulance from that area up to Flinders, thereby exacerbating the issues at the Flinders Medical Centre.

Having made those changes, a fundamental part of enabling those changes at Noarlunga will be the expenditure of more money on the Repat site, and enabling moving departments from Noarlunga, thereby freeing up space at Noarlunga. In turn, a 30-bed acute ward will be moved from Flinders to Noarlunga, thus freeing up those 30 extra places.

To put this into perspective, in terms of its effect, excluding the treatment of juveniles, this will double the size of the Flinders emergency department. This is a direct result of policies pursued by this government for the benefit of the people of the south and their health systems. Lest there be any doubt, it is a direct response to the disasters inflicted on us collectively in the south as a result of Transforming Health.

Another promise made as part of my election campaign was in relation to the rectification of the notorious Flagstaff Road, which is a three-lane road with the middle lane bidirectional. For the record, this was opposed by many still in this place when given the opportunity to express a view. The Labor Party are against this, and have always been against the rectification of this temporary, 30-plus-year-old measure, which causes considerable safety issues. It has been the cause of many accidents and fatalities, not to mention the fact that 25,000 vehicles use that road each and every day.

It has been a longstanding issue in the south and there has been absolutely zero interest in getting it fixed by the government of the day until the election of this Marshall Liberal government. The end result is the commitment of $32.9 million to the rectification of the road, turning it into a proper four-lane road, with two lanes either way, plus footpaths, etc. We are at the stage now where comprehensive design is being done as we speak. There has been significant community consultation, and the project itself is well underway and timed to mesh with the completion of the work at Darlington so that my community has only one lot of roadworks to navigate, assuming of course that they work in the city, which many of them do.

As we speak, another election commitment in my electorate is being delivered: the rectification of Candy Road, which for 30-odd years has been a left-turn-only road. It was changed quite some time ago for a variety of reasons, and that has in many respects isolated key parts of my community, not to mention the suburb of Hallett Cove on the other side of South Road. We undertook to transform that intersection so that it would be a four-way intersection, complete with right-hand turns, just like people in the north or elsewhere have. That work is well underway as I speak.

We made a commitment to the Flagstaff Community Centre to help them fund female-friendly change room facilities as well as build on an earlier commitment from the member for Boothby to enable a transformation of their clubroom facilities. We delivered on that money. We have spent a considerable amount of time with the local council, endeavouring to get their buy-in, and we remain optimistic that they will do so insofar as planning amendments, etc., are concerned.

Looking forward and addressing some of the measures, I have addressed the Southern Health Expansion Plan, but there are several other measures in train in my electorate that I think are worthy of commentary or consideration. One of the major ones is going to be the fulfilment of, and the continued investment in, Glenthorne National Park, a large chunk of which—the Happy Valley Reservoir—falls in my electorate. The upshot of this will be a considerable boon for not just my community but arguably for many others who will visit the area to do bushwalks, etc.

To be completely clear, the intention is that the reservoir and the wildlife therein will be protected and will be an integrated part of a national park. This will occur once further investment in the filtration plant at the reservoir has been undertaken, not just in day-to-day infrastructure but by a considerable investment to enable it to do two very separate things. One is part of a broader program with SA Water to enable the use of solar power to cut costs for the business unit; more particularly, the other, which is more relevant in terms of the ongoing use of the reservoir, will be the installation and use of upgraded, current state-of-the-art filtration works.

A further Davenport-specific item that was touched on by the Governor in his address is the advent of the rail system coming to the seat of Davenport by virtue of the Flinders Link station being built at Flinders University as we speak. This will not just radically transform Flinders and options for people who wish to travel to Flinders, be that for medical or for educational reasons, but it will also provide an opportunity for my community to access rail services, with the frequency and the efficiency that they bring as a means to travel to the CBD, in particular. So we are very much looking forward to getting trains coming to Davenport. I have mentioned that in the house earlier.

I do recall some comment from the member for Kaurna, who was absolutely shocked that I would actually point out the fact that my community has in my view very poor public transport options. The reality is it has been that way for many years. You only have to look at Flagstaff Road to see the complete lack of care that the previous government had for my community and its transport options. So getting access to the rail coming into Flinders and putting in place some smart ways of availing people of that capacity, of the ability to use that system to travel as a result, either directly to the Flinders precinct and/or to the CBD, will be, as it eventuates, greatly appreciated.

I want to move now to very briefly make some observations regarding the fires. We have had some very good contributions from both sides of the chamber insofar as their experience on or around the fires, both on Kangaroo Island and in the Adelaide Hills, with Cudlee Creek. I just want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the contributions made by the CFS crews in my area, those of Cherry Gardens and of Happy Valley.

Cherry Gardens is an interesting CFS group in that they do not comprise simply the standard CFS station; they also comprise a separate airstrip, which is quite literally on the border of my electorate and that of the member for Heysen. Both parts of Cherry Gardens as well as Happy Valley played significant roles in fighting not just the fires we are talking about.

We have had three in our own community in very recent weeks, which have been very quickly extinguished before they became a major issue, primarily as a result of the prompt action of those CFS teams, not limited to but including the bomber crews. It would be remiss of me not to take a slightly indulgent detour and record a shout-out to those people who are maintaining those water bombers and ensuring that they are ready to perform the task that they have so brilliantly done for us, including my young nephew Jim.

As I said, the discussion about the impact of the fires, their immediate impact, the heroism and courage we saw, have all been very, very bipartisan, and that is as it should be. I would just invite consideration on the same basis of some of the observations that I have been privy to, having spoken not just to members of the CFS but also to members of the Indigenous community.

One of the ways forward—not the only one, but one mitigating method from a climate change perspective as well as treatment of fires, moving forward—is an embrace of what has been termed cultural burning. I have absolutely no doubt, based on what I have been told—and I have no reason to doubt the advice I have been given—that number one is that our Indigenous community have effectively managed the environment for thousands of years, and they understand how to manage it in order to mitigate the impact, not to prevent fires of this type but to mitigate the impact they have on the natural environment.

We should be embracing this, and I would suggest that it is something we can embrace, because if we do not the other evidence from the CFS is that in the absence of us doing that, the do-nothing approach insofar as cleaning areas up is instead embraced, it is embraced to the detriment of my community.

I have considerable issues. I am writing to councils all the time asking, on behalf of residents, for them to clean up specific areas. They remain loath to do so. In my view, the answer is for us collectively to not only embrace but also facilitate culturally appropriate and culturally inscribed, if you will, or driven, means of cleaning up those areas and, as I said, in so doing, mitigating some of the impacts.

I also want to make a point, insofar as the New South Wales interconnector is concerned, that it is something we undertook to do and it is something that, as the minister pointed out in the house today, we will in fact be doing. The expectation is that that will enable South Australia to sell more renewable power more easily into the eastern seaboard. The practical reality is that it will also enable an easier way to have the by-product of burning black coal—that is to say, deriving power that has been sourced from the use of black coal primarily coming from New South Wales and Queensland—being used to balance up the supply and demand equation here in South Australia.

I reiterate points I have made before. Again, this is a far longer term consideration, but in my considered view not only do we need a mix of renewable power but South Australia should, at the very least, embrace consideration of a long-term look at the use of nuclear technology to enable the generation of base load power because without that, should things continue as they are, we will, particularly in times of need, be continually reverting to the import of coal-sourced power. That is the practical economic reality today.

My challenge to all of us here is to not only acknowledge that but seek to at least consider the use of nuclear as a longer term component in our fuel mix. That does not mean that we have to necessarily implement it tomorrow, but in my view we should look to at least utilise it because it is not only base load, and it is not only stable but, more particularly, insofar as its greenhouse gas emissions are concerned, they are zero. In that respect, it is one of the cleanest forms of power available.

I will now make some observations on some of the contributions made earlier. The member for Port Adelaide talked about the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and the need, in her view, for escalating or re-engaging the issue of buybacks. As someone who grew up on the river, I have a very strong view that buybacks mean you do not just buy back the water: you buy back the town, you buy back the community and you basically gut it and you hollow it out.

My strong view is that we should continue to advocate for what are very easily achievable means of deriving increased efficiencies. I made a speech in this house at the advent of the release of the royal commission report. The royal commission report actually detailed—and I cannot recall the percentages—that the South Australian part of the Murray-Darling Basin has, roughly speaking, 95 per cent of all the properties and all the water use on the river metered, so South Australia does the right thing in terms of measuring how much water is being taken.

A royal commission was established to address the theft of water. We have a situation in the northern parts of the Murray-Darling Basin where, according to the royal commission, well under 50 per cent of the properties taking water are doing so on a metered basis. If you wanted a quick efficiency, what you would do is go to the northern parts of the basin and say, 'Hey, listen, what we want you to do is put some meters in so that everybody is doing the right thing.' This is, in my view, a finding that has not been given sufficient import, and it is easy: put some meters in. If you want to drag water out, put some meters in.

Finally, I want to address the issue of jobs. The member for Cheltenham made some points in this regard. In my view, he rightly identified, and in fact personalised by reference to his family, the need for us to provide jobs as a primary requirement of us, not only as representatives of our community but as stewards of our economy as well. I have been somewhat surprised in that I have not heard quoted anywhere what I think is probably for me the most searing part of the most recent Deloitte Access Economics report.

I want to take the opportunity to read the part in question into Hansard and urge all of us to embrace the impact and commit ourselves to fixing it in a bipartisan fashion. They make the point that youth unemployment is the highest in Australia here in South Australia. They go on to make the point:

There are now fewer people under the age of 25 in South Australia than there were three decades ago—and fewer young people employed as well. At the same time, the overall population has risen by close to half a million.

Over the last 30 years—this is the bipartisan bit; it is governments of all political persuasions—there has been a fundamental shift in the demographics of South Australia. We have fewer people under the age of 25 now than we had 30 years ago and yet we have half a million more people. We are all responsible for doing what we can to address that.

The means by which we can address that—and it is up to all of us—is to look to exploit whatever competitive advantages South Australia has. By competitive advantage, I mean simply by what means South Australia can encourage investment and jobs and industry. By what means can South Australia and South Australians encourage other businesses and industries to establish themselves here?

At the entrance to this chamber there are busts of two of the most significant contributors to our state, premiers Playford and Dunstan. Dunstan, of course, was famous for his contributions particularly on social policy. Playford, in my view, was fundamentally responsible for the transformation of the South Australian economy, to the point where Adelaide was, in my memory as a very young man coming down from the bush, the number three sized city in the country. It is now number five.

The Playford lesson was, very simply, reduced to its essentials; he took the risk. He took a large deposit of brown coal at Leigh Creek and turned it into the cheapest energy available on the Australian mainland. As a consequence, this place was the best place to set up businesses. Not only were there factories building cars, washing machines, fridges and the rest of it, but as a consequence of that investment we saw the ancillary industries—lawyers, accountants, clerical work—and jobs for our children arose as a result.

That is the lesson. That is the practical lesson. That took considerable courage, in that the very first thing Playford needed to do was to nationalise the then private providers of power in South Australia. I am not necessarily advocating that we adopt that rap, but the point is that cheap energy means that there will be industry and jobs available, because that is one of the primary input costs for any business, regardless of the business type.

In closing, my point is a challenge to all of us, as we look forward and as the member for Cheltenham has pointed out, to actually ensure that, in his case, our children have the capacity to be provided with jobs and opportunities here in what is the best state in the best country in the world. In my case, and for many people of my age, it is an opportunity to provide the capacity for those of our children who have gone interstate or overseas looking for opportunities we can no longer provide. In making that point, I conclude my remarks.

The Hon. R. SANDERSON (Adelaide—Minister for Child Protection) (17:50): I rise to give my Address in Reply to His Excellency Hieu Van Le's speech outlining his government's plans for the future.

Since becoming the Minister for Child Protection many improvements have been made to the child protection system. We have met my electoral commitments of foster and kinship care repayments to age 21 in response to research showing that 30 per cent of children leaving care were homeless within their first 12 months. We have broadened the qualifications for front-line workers to fill longstanding front-line vacancies. We also conducted an audit of all children in residential care to ensure that no child is left behind.

We announced the expansion of permanency options, including open adoption, and we recently commenced a pilot program for family group conferencing to help build scaffolding within families to keep children safe. We are also working on intensive family support systems in the northern suburbs, which are showing good results that are very heartening, along with a western suburbs program due to start very soon with an Aboriginal-specific focus. We are focusing on early intervention and prevention, as members can see.

We also appointed the first ever Commissioner for Aboriginal Children and Young People in November 2018. We decommissioned Queenstown, the large residential care unit, in response to over a decade of recommendations by the Office of the Guardian for Children and Young People. We also appointed a lead psychiatrist to oversee our most complex cases. We expanded the disability team to help fund and get packages for some of our children; up to 25 per cent to 30 per cent of children in care are eligible for the NDIS scheme.

We established an Aboriginal lead practitioner, and we now use the Winangay Kinship Carer Assessment Tool, a culturally appropriate kinship care placement tool. In 2019, we launched a reconciliation action plan, an Aboriginal action plan and an Aboriginal employment strategy, and I am very proud to say that DCP has one of the highest proportion of Aboriginal staff of all the government departments. We also partner with Aboriginal community-controlled organisations, in fact doubling our contract expenditure with them.

We engaged in significant contract reform with our foster care agencies and residential care providers to ensure payments are made for active placements and not vacancies. The last quarter saw, for the first time ever, all agencies receiving growth payments in foster care. With the support of both the department and the non-government organisations, we have been able to continue growing the proportion of children and young people living in family-based care. In 2017, this was 83.1 per cent, and that has now risen to 86.5 per cent as at December 2019.

I met my target of a net increase of 50 foster carer households in the 2018-19 year, and I am on track to meet this again in the 2019-20 year. We have had a statewide effort to recruit and retain foster carers, working closely with the non-government sector. My department is better scoping for kinship care options, and there has been a significant increase in kinship care. We are growing our Long Term Guardianship (Specified Person) placements, which in the 2016-17 year were 19. In the 2018-19 year, 47 had guardianship transferred. We know that permanency and stability are vital for good outcomes for children.

Case plans are at 88.9 per cent of all children. This is higher than the national average and a rise over the last 12 months from 53.4 per cent, noting that the year before that they were not even reported because the figure was so low. We have released an in-care strategy called Every Effort for Every Child. We have reduced the overall cost of children and young people in care due to the growth in the proportion of children and young people in family-based care and the number of children who are now accessing an NDIS package negotiated by DCP staff.

We had our inaugural DCP staff recognition awards in 2019 and we are proud to be hosting this year in Adelaide the 2020 National Foster and Kinship Care Conference in September and in 2020 the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect international congress. Both will be held at the Adelaide Convention Centre.

As we move into the second half of this term of government, I remain as enthusiastic and dedicated as I have always been to positively contribute to my constituents in the seat of Adelaide, to those in the broader community who have contact with the child protection system, to the children and young people in care and to the prosperity of the entire state as a cabinet minister. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.