More For Health Campaign

Mr PICTON (Kaurna) (15:05): My question is to the Premier. Premier, how much of taxpayers' funds are being spent on your latest health advertising campaign, More for Health?

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL (Dunstan—Premier) (15:05): I don't have those exact details, but what I do know is that it is very important to continually provide public health advice and also to provide information on what we are doing. With the health system in South Australia, we are of course going into a difficult time, an anxious time for many South Australians as we do open our borders with New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT.

We know those opposite had an extraordinary advertising campaign in the lead-up to the last election. That basically featured the Labor Party major players. In our advertising, we are very keen to make sure that we abide by the new restrictions and guidelines that we put in place that don't use my image, don't talk about Liberal government, but do specifically talk about the work that we are doing as a government in South Australia investing in our health system. I don't have that exact detail.

I know those opposite had their very expensive taxpayer-funded campaign to sell the Transforming Health proposal. It never really went very far. It was a pretty hard sell. You could imagine the sort of money that would have to be spent by taxpayers to get a positive spin on that very poorly thought-out idea. At one stage, one of the most glowing endorsements we received from Transforming Health was from the former health minister himself, now the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Croydon, who was being captured in all his glory in the other place making an extensive endorsement—

The SPEAKER: Premier, there is a point of order. I am keen to observe the process under 135.

Mr PICTON: Standing order 98, sir: it was a very specific question in terms of how much money is being spent on the current advertising campaign.

The SPEAKER: Very well. I am listening carefully to the Premier's answer. I ask the Premier to reflect on the substance of the question.

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: Thank you very much, sir. What I am advised is that it's significantly less than that which was expended almost four years ago by those opposite. In fact, I have just been informed that those opposite in the lead-up to the last election spent $1.6 million on what could only be described as a highly political advertising campaign trying to sell the now disgraced Transforming Health. It did receive strong endorsement from the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Hurtle Vale and many of those people who are opposite there. I am advised that our budget is far more modest—around $1 million.