Appropriation Bill 2022

Estimates Committees

Adjourned debate on motion:

That the proposed expenditures referred to Estimates Committees A and B be agreed to.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta) (15:52): I am pleased to have the opportunity to continue my remarks in relation to the estimates committees from prior to the lunchtime break. Prior to the break, for those who are just picking up the parliamentary broadcast now or for those who have forgotten over the two hours intervening what was the pacy and exciting material that we were dealing with before lunch, we had just established, thanks to the chief executive, Martin Westwell, and the minister, the member for Wright, that the Labor Party was delivering on its election commitments, as is appropriate.

The funding mechanism they were using to deliver on their election commitments was indeed in relation to the school election commitments, at least the funds made available to the Department for Education as a result of the national school funding reforms, commonly known as the Gonski agreement. So, using those existing resources from the Department for Education, the department is now first delivering on the election commitments, as is appropriate, and secondly, doing a body of work within the education department to identify which programs and services should be cut or which deferred or which changed in some way to make the money available to deliver on those commitments.

We identified what a couple of those commitments were—obviously, the ongoing funding for the technical colleges, the funding to be made available to relieve families of $100 remission on school fees for the next couple of years, and that was identified by Mr Bernardi and Professor Westwell, and this is all delivering on the government's election commitments.

What I am interested to know, and what I think people in education will be interested increasingly to learn, is the detail of what other arrangements are being made to create this funding. The minister was good enough in his responses to confirm a number of programs were proceeding as planned with no cuts proposed.

In my earlier remarks, I commended him and congratulated him on those: Clontarf and Shooting Stars, supporting young Aboriginal South Australians; the International Baccalaureate program at a number of schools; the Literacy Guarantee unit; the year 1 phonics check; the Music Education Strategy and a range of pathway initiatives such as flexible industry pathways; the World of Work Challenge; and VET for years 7 to 10 students, which will obviously work well with the technical colleges if it is designed well, as we hope it will be. All of those are staying.

There was one program identified that would have $15 million over four years changed to $15 million over six years, which is not a dramatic reduction in funding but it is a reduction in funding. In the coming weeks and months, I trust the minister will come back to the house in response to my question, which he took on notice, on what other programs there will be changes to.

In relation to this one, there is $15 million over four years to respond to the Graham report into suspensions, exclusions and expulsions. The Graham report itself was a result of a compromise brokered by the Deputy Premier and the Greens spokesperson on education, Tammy Franks, and me to help us get through the 2019 reforms to the new education Children's Services Act. That was a good outcome.

It was a good report by Professor Linda Graham, an expert in inclusive education, who came down from Queensland. It was a substantial report with challenging recommendations, not all of which I agreed with as minister but many of which I was very enthusiastic about exploring to deliver for South Australian students, particularly that vast number of students with disability, who represent such a disproportionate bulk of those students who experience take-home suspensions or exclusions—not so much expulsions, because that rarely happens in South Australia. Nevertheless, Professor Graham established that these students were particularly at risk.

Aboriginal students, students with a range of needs, students under guardianship were represented in the proportion of students in this category, but if they had also a disability or were students just with a disability, they were the vast bulk.

There was $15 million committed by the Marshall Liberal government over four years to deliver a response to this review and its recommendations. That has been stretched to over six. Some would describe this as a cut. The minister described it as:

…a big body of work, and I want to make sure that we get right. No doubt, whatever the model we end up with we will be, for better or worse, stuck with it for some time.

I am pleased it is going ahead. I wish it was over four years: it is over six. I am pleased to note the former government's commitment to an early win in this area for school-wide positive behaviour for learning being implemented. It is being implemented in 40 schools this year and next, and that is going ahead, with recruitment for schools currently underway.

Consultation on the decommissioning of flexible learning options is underway, with a set of recommendations going to the minister this month. We look forward to hearing more about those recommendations in due course. The house will be interested to know that the minister confirmed that the government has no plans to agree to follow through on the recommendation of Professor Graham to create an education ombudsman. I do not say that that is a bad response. It is a response that I think the Marshall government would have ultimately come up with, too, if we were still in government but, nevertheless, it is an interesting change of position from the Labor Party.

In relation to a couple of Labor election commitments, I note the workforce plan for teachers to teach specialist subjects. We asked when it will be finished, when it will be released and will it deliver on what Labor promised. The minister took the bulk of that question on notice, and we look forward to the response.

We had a discussion about the government's commitment to increase permanency rates in the teaching workforce by 10 per cent. The minister confirmed that, currently, there is 80 per cent permanency, according to departmental advice, but did seem reluctant to commit to delivering on the election commitment. I will quote:

My answer is that the department will undertake policy work to identify where the level of teacher permanency can be increased—

and then went on to say—

whilst still maintaining flexibility for schools and preschools to manage their staffing needs.

There is nothing wrong with that, except that it does not deliver on what was a pretty specific election commitment in Labor's seven-point plan for teacher quality. There are indeed no plans for significant changes to placement rights and we learnt that EB negotiations are expected to begin later this year but are to be overseen by the Minister for Industrial Relations, which was a similar arrangement to that which was in place last year.

As Minister for Education, during that time I copped some criticism from some for the Minister for Industrial Relations then leading that negotiation. I trust that those who criticised that arrangement will apply the same blowtorch pressure to the new government, but that is ultimately a matter for them.

In relation to early childhood, we had significant discussion about the early childhood royal commission and the Early Learning Strategy. It was a good discussion, it was interesting, it was nuanced and it was constructive. I am pleased the government is continuing with much of the work we announced last year during the announcement of the Early Learning Strategy. Well done.

Ultimately, no commitment is still on the table to have any offer of universal three-year-old preschool available to all families in 2026, as I believe was Labor's election commitment. There is certainly no money in the budget to expand the program. I am sure we will talk more about that and the other range of exciting issues that the Minister for Education and I discussed on that interesting day a couple of weeks ago.

Mr BROWN (Florey) (16:00): It is with great pleasure that I rise to support the motion to note the reports from Estimates Committee A and Estimates Committee B. Can I say at the outset that I found the process this year to be a lot more enjoyable than I have in the previous four years I spent attending estimates committees as a member of the opposition. I am not sure whether it was because of the vantage point or the refreshing attitude of ministers to actually answer questions asked by people—who is to say?

It certainly was an experience where you found that ministers were a lot more open to engaging and responding than in previous years, when there was quite a lot of rancour in not only this chamber but also the other chamber during estimates committees. Hopefully, it was a pleasant experience, not only for those members who have been here for quite some time but also for the new members of this place who had their first experience of estimates. The chairs of the estimates committees—the Deputy Speaker and Chair of the Economic and Finance Committee—found their experience enjoyable, and they seemed to do quite a good job I thought in the chair. Long may they continue to provide that particular function.

When we talk about the reports of Estimates Committee A and Estimates Committee B, it is worthwhile not only reflecting on a series of numbers attached to a lot of different portfolios but actually looking at the initiatives behind those numbers and what those initiatives will be able to deliver to the people of South Australia, who, after all, are the people who have put us into this place so that we can deliver for them. I would like to explore some of the initiatives included in the budget so that we might be able to look behind those numbers and get more of an understanding of what in fact the report itself actually represents.

Starting with Health, obviously that was one area that was extremely important during the election campaign in March this year and also one that was extremely important in the budget that was handed down. We can see that the government has committed to 350 more paramedics and ambulance officers over a four-year period. Before the election campaign, I visited the Parafield station, which is in my electorate. It was in my previous electorate and it is in my current electorate. It is one of the state's newest and largest ambulance stations.

Even there, I found that staff were very much harried and very much suffering from a lack of resources. The previous government had obviously failed to provide enough for them. I know that they will find it particularly refreshing that the new government has provided so much in funds over the next four-year period along with a boost to some of the existing ambulance stations, making them larger and better equipped.

I am quite fortunate in that Parafield is extremely large and extremely new, but I know that some other stations are being upgraded. I am sure that is something that is very much welcomed by those local communities. The new stations will be at Norwood, Woodville, Golden Grove and Edwardstown, but the existing stations at Campbelltown, Mount Barker, Gawler and Victor Harbor will be completely upgraded. That will be a fantastic result for those other communities.

Over the forward estimates we are not just talking about increasing the number of paramedics. The government has also committed to 101 doctors and 300 nurses as part of the comprehensive plan we have to increase the capacity of our health system, which will help to make South Australia a much better place.

I also note something that is particularly dear to my heart: the Asbestos Diseases Society of SA is receiving an increase of $400,000 over four years. It is an excellent initiative and one that I was very happy to support during the election campaign. It is a fantastic organisation that does a great job for those people who suffer from asbestos-related diseases. Not only do they help people who are suffering from the disease but they also help increase awareness of asbestos-related diseases, which is an extremely important issue. I have seen you, Mr Acting Speaker, at events they have coordinated.

Closer to home, one of the other things the government is doing in my electorate is providing 48 additional subacute beds not only at the Lyell McEwin Hospital but also at Modbury, two hospitals that are definitely worthy of increased support and resources, and I know they will provide better resources for our local area. For too long, it has been a problem of not enough services being provided for particular diseases or particular services in the area.

That extra capacity will allow us to increase the spectrum of services that we provide. It is an excellent initiative of the government. I was happy to support it during the campaign, and I know it is now something the local community will be excited to see delivered now that the government has changed. However, it is not just about staff. Staff are important, but staff need to have the infrastructure so that they can deliver services.

That is why it is a great announcement that the Modbury Hospital cancer centre will be established at Modbury Hospital at a cost of $28 million over three years. This cancer centre will enable lots of residents in my electorate and across the north-eastern suburbs to be treated closer to home. Although there are fantastic cancer centres in many of our hospitals, it is great to see that service being provided at Modbury Hospital.

Those are some of the services the government is looking forward to providing in the health space over the forward estimates. It is not just about providing services such as health. It is also about trying to grow the economy in South Australia and also, hopefully, not only grow the existing economy but also move into new areas where South Australia currently does not have a footprint. That is why it is fantastic that the government is producing the Hydrogen Jobs Plan, with $593 million over four years, to create state-owned infrastructure to provide the capacity for South Australia to export hydrogen overseas and to generate power in South Australia and be a state-owned enterprise.

I am sure all South Australians were disappointed to see the previous government sell off just for a quick buck the generators that the previous Labor government had bought. It is great to see the state government investing in this area now so that this new hydrogen facility can provide employment and export opportunities and also help provide downward pressure on power prices in South Australia.

That is part of the overall flavour of the budget—to provide economic development opportunities for South Australia. For example, one of the things we have is the Economic Recovery Fund, which is $100 million over four years. That will enable the state government to fund new initiatives to promote economic growth and development opportunities in South Australia. It will help co-invest with business to provide opportunities for South Australians to not only find employment but to also grow new industries so that we can invest in the jobs of the future and not only the jobs of today.

Another announcement made earlier this week, which I know the Minister for Trade was very excited about, is the re-establishment of Brand SA, which is $6.2 million over four years. I know everyone on this side of the house is very excited to see Brand SA return, to see us have pride in South Australian products and promote South Australians buying South Australian, instead of hoping that it happens all by itself, which seems to have been the attitude of the previous government.

That turns my mind to one of the other great announcements in the budget that was included in the reports of the Estimates Committees A and B, and that is the return of the Adelaide 500. As I was talking to people in the electorate of Florey during the campaign, they told me that they very much thought that it was a dent to South Australia's pride that they had a government that had decided to turn its back on this fantastic event. They were very much looking forward to the possibility of a Labor government bringing back the event.

That is why it is so good that it will come back in December this year. It is an event that has excited not only people who are interested in motorsport but also everyone right across the hospitality sector, to see people coming to South Australia and spending money here in our great state and providing employment for many people.

Another area of particular importance in the South Australian budget, which I know was explored during the estimates committee process, is that of education. I know that the important issue of the royal commission into early childhood education and care, which is being established and which I know is funded to the extent of $2 million over two years, will help to investigate the best way of delivering on the commitments that the government took to the election.

One that I am particularly passionate about is that it will explore how all families can have access to out-of-school-hours care at both preschool and primary school ages because we all know that in our busy lives the school day, which was set sometime in the past, does not fully cater to modern expectations. That is why, rather than sit back and wait and see what other people do or see what possible solutions people overseas or interstate come up with, we are going to have a royal commission to fully investigate how, in the South Australian context, things can be changed to properly deliver the services the people expect.

Not only have we decided to invest in that royal commission to make those recommendations but we are also investing in our schools. One of the things I am very excited about to see locally in my area is investment in two particular school projects, and one of those is $1 million for a new gym for the Ingle Farm East Primary School, which was included in the state budget. I first visited the school over a year ago, and I was quite surprised to see that the gym had to be at least 30 or 40 years old. It is one of the smallest gyms I have seen at any school in South Australia and very much in need of a refurbishment or expansion.

I was delighted to be able to get the agreement of the now Minister for Education when he was in opposition, and also the Deputy Premier during the best part of the policy development process, to give funds to that school for a new gym. I can tell you that the community of Ingle Farm, and particularly those students at the Ingle Farm East Primary School, are very much deserving of that investment. This school needs that money and it needs these extra facilities, and I know that they will be very, very appreciative when it gets built.

Another thing I have to talk about in terms of school infrastructure is a project that is very dear to my heart because my children go to this particular school, and that is the new bridge joining the two campuses of the Mawson Lakes School across Dry Creek. For years, this project has been talked about. I wrote to the previous minister a number of times about this project to try to make sure that it was properly funded. Although I did get some way with him, I cannot say that he said no completely, but unfortunately the necessary amount of funds was not able to be provided.

I know that the school community is very excited that finally it looks like this project is going ahead and should be open next year, hopefully in time for the school year. Recently, during heavy rains the Dry Creek area around there was particularly flooded. Local roads were almost washed away. I think that for children to be expected to cross a small causeway, which is almost completely under water, during serious amounts of rain is absolutely ridiculous. I know that, on behalf of the local community of Mawson Lakes, we are all very excited to have a government that is now prepared to make that investment and see a proper bridge constructed.

Another issue that impacts a number of people in my electorate is that of public housing. A number of people have talked to me in the last few weeks about how excited they were to see such a large amount of money committed in the budget to public housing going forward. It is $177.5 million over four years for the Public Housing Improvement Program, which means that those pieces of maintenance work that people have waited for, for such a long time in some cases, will now be able to be completed and should have an enormous impact on the lives of people in public housing.

Not only that, but finally some of the services that were cut by the previous government regarding homelessness have had their funding increased, namely, $10.4 million over four years is being spent on supporting those homeless support services so that we might do something about addressing the increase we have experienced in rough sleeper numbers in South Australia.

Even pre COVID, those numbers were going up as a result of the previous government's cuts and changes in policies, and now that we are able to make a proper investment into providing services for those people who are sleeping rough in our CBD we should be able to see those numbers come down. I know that everyone on this side of the house is committed to doing so, and I expect that will be the case.

One of the other great initiatives contained in the budget, and I really do want to single out the Treasurer for his level of commitment to this particular policy, is that of the 3 per cent low deposit home loan scheme for first-home buyers. It is a great initiative that will see South Australians have much greater access to assistance for deposits and help those people who have the incomes necessary but who have just not been able to save a deposit because of the way the rental market is at the moment.

I think we will see that this sort of innovative policy will help to address some of the crisis in South Australia's rental market and also in our housing market. While it is not a silver bullet, it will certainly be part of the solution. While we are talking about cost of living, one of the other things that the government has put into the budget (very well in my opinion) is the doubling of the Cost of Living Concession.

I know from my experience working in the human services sector that the Cost of Living Concession really makes a lot of difference to a lot of people in our community, especially those people living on low fixed incomes. To help address the cost-of-living problems in this year by doubling that concession for one year will help to address that. Again, it is not the solution to the problem, but it shows that the government is prepared to actually engage and try to help people, rather than simply say, 'Well, there's nothing we can do,' and not do anything about it.

This is very much related to, for example, the change we have made to the materials and services charge. I have to give the previous government the credit here: it was their election commitment first, which we decided to match. I know as a parent myself, with children in public schools, and also from my constituents who have raised this issue with me, that helping to reduce that charge now has had a good impact on families.

The same goes for the way that the budget contains initiatives to support communities out there and support community groups. I have spoken to a number of people from different multicultural groups about how much they appreciate the support the new government is giving them. For example, in the multicultural affairs space, $16 million is being spent over four years to provide additional funding to support multicultural events and initiatives, and that level of extra support is very much appreciated.

We know that providing support services in those communities, especially communities that come from a non-English-speaking background, can be very difficult. It is very difficult for government to provide those support services. People often look to community groups not only to provide support and help during things like the pandemic but also to provide the support on an ongoing basis with finances and other things. Being able to provide funding for those organisations so that they can continue to provide the services to their community is not only something I know they really appreciate but also something I believe is very much at the heart of what this government does.

One of the other areas that is very important to providing support to our community is that of public safety. Some people have said there can be no greater right than that of safety, and perhaps they are right about that. It is good to see that the government has provided assistance to those people who are keeping our streets safe by providing the necessary funding to complete the work that was—well, 'started' is not really the word I would use—slowed under the previous government with regard to multipurpose load-bearing vests. Providing $6.5 million over four years to make sure that all sworn officers have access to vests and storage facilities so we can make sure that those people who keep us safe actually have the resources they need to do their jobs properly.

I am also pleased that we provided $924,000 over four years for the creation of the public sex offender register so that people in our community can keep informed about what is going on in their communities and can properly make decisions about the safety of them and their families. If I was talking about the reports from Estimates Committee A and Estimates Committee B, I would be remiss not to address a particular subject that I know is very passionately on the lips of those in the opposition and that is community and sports grants.

These community and sports facilities grants are something that I think we have done an excellent job in. I know, personally, that people in the community were talking to me before the election saying how much they regretted the level of support they—well, 'received' is not really the word—did not receive from the previous government, and so they very much wanted to see a government that actually was committed to helping out the local area I represent.

I am pleased that not only the Pooraka Football Club but also the Ingle Farm Sporting Club were able to receive commitments from the government to upgrade their facilities sometime over the next few years. I think they are excellent clubs and very much worthy of support. I make no apology for being an advocate for those clubs and community groups in my local area, and I will continue to be an advocate for those particular groups. I know that not only on behalf of those clubs but also on behalf of the local community in Florey that we are so glad to have a government that actually supports the local area.

We heard about how the previous Treasurer kept saying that he had ice water in his veins. I am so proud to be part of a government that has a Treasurer who does not have ice water in his veins but a passionate heart that supports the people of South Australia and their communities and does everything possible to make our state a better place. I commend the report to the house.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Leader of the Opposition) (16:20): I take this opportunity to rise to make a few brief remarks, nothing too extensive, on the estimates process, which really brings to a close the budget process that has been before this house now for the last few weeks.

I think the estimates process is worth reflecting on. It could do with some reform perhaps in some ways, in terms of which members are allowed to participate in it from which chamber, but overall it does provide an opportunity to analyse and interrogate aspects of the budget. While it could probably be modernised a little bit, it does give us a chance to dig into the figures and learn a bit more about how the budget is structured and assembled and the rationale and motivations for particular decisions that the government of the day has chosen to take with regard to putting together and administering the finances of our state.

The budget estimates process I had the privilege of being part of was pretty genial in its conduct overall, whether it was between me and the Premier, me and the Deputy Premier in her capacity as Minister for Climate, Environment and Water or, in fact, the Minister for Small and Family Business, who I shadow as well as the shadow minister for that portfolio. It was a pretty reasonable level of conduct by all involved, in terms of undertaking that scrutiny and interrogation of the figures. I really do want to thank all those members and, of course, the public servants who were involved along the way in putting together material, much of which goes unused but aims to predict the sorts of things that will be covered through this process. By way of completion, I thank all those who were involved for their contribution.

I opened my estimates questioning with what I thought was quite a straightforward question—and it turned out not to be so much—in relation to a grant that the Labor government has decided to give to the Conservation Council of South Australia. I sought clarity on whether there would be outcomes associated with this grant, whether there would be a contract between the Department for Environment and Water and the Conservation Council and whether the outcomes and that contract would be made public.

It was quite a surprise, really, and perhaps a little symbolic of my overall questioning of the Deputy Premier, that that information was not forthcoming. I did not think there was necessarily a lot to hide as to the conduct and outcomes of a financial agreement providing $1 million over four years to the peak body for environment and conservation in this state. I think the oft-used saying that sunlight is the best form of disinfectant certainly is relevant in this case. I was struck by the desire not to make that Conservation Council agreement public. As a consequence, it did beg more questions than answers as to whether there would be outcomes associated with that funding.

When it comes to the administration of the environment portfolio, practical outcomes—trees in the ground, species protected and areas of our state's landscape looked after in a sustainable way—should be at the very heart of that. Not to have revealed any outcomes or desired outcomes between the government's deal with the Conservation Council was disappointing. I asked if it was hush money, and that attracted some attention, but it felt to me that the provision of that funding could be used to placate the conservation peak body, and I think it was fair to ask that question.

The attempts not to answer questions continued with the Deputy Premier's decision not to answer any questions in relation to the restoration of West Beach and the pipeline, which had been proposed to recycle sand between the northern beaches and the more central beaches on our metropolitan coastline. While I totally understood that the Deputy Premier had declared a conflict of interest in relation to this project due to the proximity of her home to the beach at Semaphore, I did present the opportunity for public servants to provide answers directly to me, as is quite often the case through the minister in the estimates process, but that was declined, and in fact it was partially blocked, I would assess, by the Chair at the time.

I thought this would have been a very valid and reasonable opportunity to ask questions about a project running into the tens of millions of dollars that seeks to overcome a very tricky environmental problem, that being the natural littoral drift between the southern beaches and the northern beaches of our sand, a natural movement interfered with by man-made infrastructure that obviously exacerbates erosion across our beaches.

We were very keen to dig into the government's plans as to the ongoing sustainability of our metropolitan beaches, notwithstanding the Deputy Premier's decision to declare a conflict of interest following Crown advice on this matter, and the opportunity to quiz the public servants on how this might be done in the future—would there be a replacement for the pipeline, what other possible technologies, techniques, built infrastructure might be being considered?

One thing that we are very concerned about is that heavily engineered groynes might be built along our metropolitan coastline, as you would see in parts of European beaches. That is not something that we would deem overly acceptable, and I do not believe the South Australian public would deem that as acceptable. These groynes are known to work in terms of capturing sand in a defined part of the beach, but that leads to significant scarring on one side of the groyne or the other and even worse outcomes for the coast. We were very keen to hear whether or not that would be ruled out by the government.

We were also keen to hear about how the review into alternative approaches for managing the central and northern metropolitan beaches might be progressed. Unfortunately, that was not forthcoming, so we will have to wait for the next Budget and Finance Committee. We are hoping to have a special Budget and Finance Committee called to seek the input of executives from the Department for Environment and Water and also, importantly, Green Industries SA.

Green Industries SA fund the solid waste levy, and there is a mechanism there for climate-related projects to be funded. That is how we were funding the sustainability of our metropolitan beaches, so it is necessary to require the executives from both the environment department and Green Industries SA to front that upper house committee and make us and the South Australian public aware of this situation that has been cloistered in secrecy.

Public servants have been gagged, and I felt very sorry for people like John Schutz and Dr Ian Overton, who were gagged through this process, unable to give frank and fearless advice to the parliament. Even more disappointing was the fact that while the Deputy Premier was unwilling to provide South Australia's people's parliament with information with regard to this project, she was quite comfortable, despite having declared a conflict of interest, to give an extensive summary about this situation to David Bevan and other presenters on 891 radio within days. So that was disappointing.

Again, there was a lot of secrecy, a lot of avoiding questions and the gagging of senior public servants in this state. I felt those public servants were deeply embarrassed by this situation. There was an awkwardness about the exchange and, clearly, they went back to their department feeling that the situation was far from ideal. Because we were not able to ask those questions, of course, we then cannot provide answers to the concerned residents of West Beach or Henley Beach South or Henley Beach, because this problem is rapidly moving up the metropolitan coastline, so more communities are getting sucked into the problem as it continues.

As the beneficiary of improvements to our metropolitan coastline undertaken by the previous Labor government, I live in one of those coastal communities, as does the member for Morphett alongside me who has benefited from the same infrastructure that we proposed for the metropolitan coastline to the north. Labor put that in on the beaches that I represent and that the member for Morphett represents, so if it is good enough for us—and it is good enough for us because we do enjoy the benefits of that—why should the residents of West Beach, Henley Beach and beyond be denied that and really see a significant risk to the viability and sustainability of their beaches going forward in the face of a change in climate, increased storm events and the like?

We had the hush money for the Conservation Council, and they are not talking about this either. The minister is not talking about it, but the Conservation Council are not because they have been given the money, so we are not hearing the real answers here. There was hush money for the Conservation Council, a lack of answers around the coastline, and this secrecy continued.

I had the opportunity to question the Premier on his portfolios and in my role as the Leader of the Opposition. I was quite concerned again about lack of accountability and secrecy in relation to the sports rorts scandal that is unfolding here in South Australia. That is, $84.4 million was brought forward to be spent in this budget as sports club grants. On this issue, opposition questions were put to the Premier, the Treasurer, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, and the Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing, and they were met with, in our view, a wall of orchestrated evasion.

The strangeness in my exchange with the Premier was particularly odd, in that I sought to ask the Premier the role of the Premier's Delivery Unit in the management of these grants. Of course, that is the unit headed by the former Labor Party candidate and staffer, Mr Rik Morris, who is now paid more than $350,000 every year by taxpayers after that appointment, which was revealed in estimates occurred without any due process and no merit selection situation as would be expected in a Public Service position to give the public and the broader Public Service confidence that the right person was found for this job.

I asked the Premier what specifically the so-called delivery unit was doing with these grants and the Premier responded by saying, 'When you say sports grants, they are election commitments.' So I then asked him, 'Did the delivery unit prepare the cabinet submission recommending approval of these grants?' The Premier responded, 'Which grants?' I said, 'The local sports grants,' to which the Premier said, 'There is not a grant program there, just election commitments being delivered.' The sports minister was obviously prepped to say similar things in her answers and we had a very similar exchange take place, the minister responding following questioning in the vein of, 'Are you talking about election commitments?' It was exactly the same as the Premier said.

It sounds in some ways quite comical, but in fact it is very serious because the government seems to be saying that, because these were commitments made before the election, the administration of the grants after the election result does not have to follow the processes that would be normally required to provide public funds to third parties.

This has next to no accountability for the spending. Normally, these grants or commitments, if that is what the Premier wants to refer to them as, would be channelled through a Public Service process, and while there was an intention indicated by the government of the day to provide funds to a particular body, that body would still have to approve financial legitimacy, appropriate governance, potentially matching council by the property owner, which, in the very large number of cases, would be their local council. None of this was forthcoming at all for this process, and that is a real concern for us.

It appears that all these grants were committed to the recipients before the election, with their payment being made much quicker than would normally be the situation if the grants had been administered through the normal process, although the estimates process did not reveal the detail behind this process at all.

Moreover, the budget made these funds payable by 30 June 2022, only four weeks after the budget's introduction, when the full cost of that program was first revealed. This is despite the fact that the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing continues to advise the public on its website that grant programs often take many months to progress from the application stage all the way through to final notification. We have sought a list of grant recipients and the amounts provided because, after all, this is public money, not money belonging to the Labor Party.

The government has of course refused to provide this, but undoubtedly this is because the ABC has reported that 69 of the 72 grants that we are aware of were made in seats that the Labor Party held or has since gained at the election. There are significant concerns about the lack of information being provided into the public domain. Of course, we will continue to pursue this matter on behalf of South Australians until we get answers.

There were some other areas of real concern for the opposition that were revealed through the estimates process. I have talked at length in my budget reply speech about our deep concerns about two major projects. One is the greatest building project in the state's history, which is the north-south corridor, providing that freight route through metropolitan Adelaide to get goods, services and commuters to their destination, whether it is work or home or somewhere in between. The delay in that project in this budget is of great concern.

Once again, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport abysmally failed to answer questions about this project, this critical state building project. A lack of understanding about the loss of productivity and the value associated with that loss of productivity continues and was not answered at all through the budget process. There is also great concern and a high level of ambiguity in relation to the Hydrogen Jobs Plan and the state-owned hydrogen power station which is proposed for the Upper Spencer Gulf region. These major projects were initiatives that the government really failed to provide any detail on.

As I said at the beginning, the estimates process is very useful to an opposition. It allows us to deeply analyse the portfolios that we have shadow ministerial responsibility for. It assists us with policy development down the track and enables us to do one part of our job, which, as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, as the member for Dunstan often liked to refer to us as, is to hold the government of the day to account. That is a key part of our job under the Westminster system. The estimates process does not always reveal the answers that we either want or seek to get, but it does give us a significant pathway to doing that.

While I have highlighted a few key areas of concern and potential problems that our state faces down the track with the administration of the budget by this government, I still think this remains a valuable process for the amount of information that you can glean from it. With that, I conclude my remarks, and I commend the estimates process to the house.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (16:40): I am really pleased to rise to speak in support of this Appropriation Bill which, through the budget for 2022-23, sets the firm foundations to realise the Malinauskas Labor government's strong vision for South Australia.

In speaking to this bill, I thank the Treasurer, the Premier and their staff, and also agency staff, for what I think is their remarkable focus, determination and incredibly hard work to deliver the budget just a little over eight weeks post being sworn in after the state election. I believe that is an unprecedented achievement that speaks to the wisdom, the clear vision and the work ethic of all involved and to the clarity of purpose we brought to the election and have applied every day since. I again thank the Treasurer and the Premier, and I echo the comments just made about the reasonably respectful process that was engaged in by all who attended estimates committees. I thank them, all the parliamentary staff and all the agency advisers involved in it.

The implementation of this year's budget will see us start to drive change, improvements and investments across all parts of government, securing opportunities, fairness and hope for the future of our state and its people. This budget is about delivering on the promises we made at the election—promises that speak to the future we aspire to for South Australians to have. This budget prioritised health, with investments aimed squarely at boosting the capacity of ambulance services funding 350 more paramedics, new vehicles and ambulance station infrastructure, as well as delivering additional doctors, nurses and hospital beds with $2.4 billion over five years of additional expenditure.

Through the budget, we are making a once-in-a-generation investment in mental health, with a record $294 million to be allocated to provide better treatment for mental health patients through more hospital beds, expert care and support for families. Anybody who has had a loved one experience mental ill health and needed to access hospital care would know that this investment is life changing and potentially life saving.

The budget also laid the foundation for the education of children today, tomorrow and into the future, with an investment of $630 million over five years in new education initiatives. This is a massive contribution towards building a thriving public education system that is accessible and equitable for everyone. This pillar of a strong economy offers opportunity for our children. Through this investment, we will fund new technical colleges, provide $26.6 million for local school infrastructure upgrades, support continued universal access to at least 15 hours of preschool each week, implement reforms, invest $50 million for mental health and learning support in schools and provide $28.8 million to appoint an autism lead teacher in every government primary school.

My family is filled with teachers; my son works as a student support officer. The broader family is filled with many teachers and other education professionals. Like all education professionals, every one of them is deeply dedicated to what they do in nurturing and developing our next generation. Also, every single one of them speaks of the incredible need that exists in our schools, particularly around mental health, around learning support and around support for children with autism. This investment is critical in providing additional support that is absolutely required. As I am sure the Minister for Education will speak about, we are also investing $2 million into a royal commission into early childhood education and care.

It is very pleasing that this budget also placed a really strong focus on bringing our arts and live music sectors back to life. I was particularly thrilled that this budget committed $3.3 million over two years to live music grants and a further $1 million to support minor upgrades for live music venues. This is amongst a broader commitment to the entire arts sector in areas like the Fringe Festival, the Adelaide Film Festival, artist and arts organisation grants and the very important work of Support Act, with $250,000 to provide mental health support services to people in the local music industry who are dealing with issues that continue as a result of work restrictions during the pandemic.

Like many in our community, my husband and I absolutely love live music. Second to seeing live music is listening to a favourite new or not so new band on vinyl at home, particularly those bands who hail from our state. These are bands that have shaped memories, that have shaped time with friends and family, newer bands that engender excitement as they are taking on the world or getting ready to take on the world. These are bands that, through this package of support, will have new opportunities open to them, as will the venues in which they play.

I would like to give a shout-out to some of those incredible South Australian bands that, like many others, will have the opportunity to apply for this really crucial funding. They include The Dunes, The Meatbeaters, CULL The Band, Fear and Loathing, Mum Thinks Blue, Teenage Joans, Bitchspawn, The Toss, Oscar the Wild, Hey Harriet, Ricky Albeck and the Belair Line Band, The Systemaddicts, Blood Sucking Freaks, Chelsea Manor, Young Offenders, Mum Friends, West Thebarton, Juliette Seizure & the Tremor-Dolls, Bad/Dreems, The Mark of Cain, The Molting Vultures, the Numbskulls, Horror My Friend, Jess Day, The Empty Threats and Green Circles, just to name a few. I wish every one of them and the many others continued success on local stages and beyond.

Like many in this house, in the community, certainly in our southern community and, I suspect, many on the other side of this house, I am delighted that this government is bringing back the Adelaide 500. This is a race that all South Australians can rightly be proud of. It has held a special place in the social and economic heart of our state, and I am so pleased that we have invested in bringing it back and bringing it back to the heart of our state.

I am really excited that this budget also supports our beautiful southern community, including an upgrade to the Noarlunga station—a much-needed upgrade that will make it safer—creating dedicated female facilities and upgrading the gym at the South Adelaide Football Club, investing in a number of the sporting clubs the member for Hurtle Vale spoke about earlier, helping to revitalise Beach Road and funding a domestic violence prevention and recovery hub in the south.

There is further investment to our southern infrastructure, including upgrading Main South Road for duplication between Seaford and Sellicks. In partnership with the federal government, we will be funding and on/off ramp from the Southern Expressway at Majors Road. Both commitments will make our roads safer, less congested and travel in the our southern community much easier.

I am so incredibly honoured to have been sworn in as the Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence and Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing. I am viscerally determined to use the time that I have to make change that makes a difference in people's lives and that strengthens families and communities.

In my portfolio areas, our budget reflects our government's commitment to ensuring that equality of opportunity exists for everyone, with a particular focus on:

increasing the participation of women in our economy and in every aspect of community life;

advancing gender equality;

preventing and ending all forms of violence against women;

doing everything we possibly can to keep children and young people safe from abuse and neglect; and

making sure that our most vulnerable children and young people are at the centre of our decision-making and actions and that they are empowered to thrive.

As I said during the estimates committee meetings, our government will be making investments where they really make a difference. Every South Australian child and young person deserves to be safe, cared for and loved. As a government and as a community, we must always do what we can to keep children safe. That is why we are investing an additional $128.9 million over five years into our child protection system to meet the costs of caring for children and young people who enter care and to help ensure we can fulfil our responsibility to keep children and young people safe from abuse.

In this budget, we are making the required investment to meet need in the child protection system, including the cost of supporting children and young people in out-of-home care. Our budget offers an opportunity to forward plan and to provide surety for children's placement and care, while still, of course, relentlessly striving always for a slowing of the growth rate of children entering care in the first place.

Many in our community say that child protection is everybody's responsibility, that everybody has a role to play to ensure children are protected and that they are afforded every opportunity to realise their full potential in life. To do this, we must improve community understanding about the deeply interconnected issues that families experience: mental ill health, domestic violence, poverty and intergenerational trauma. We must change public discourse and focus to ensure we bring that mantra to life.

We must focus on strengthening vulnerable families so that they have the best possible chance of succeeding and keeping together. We will be doing this through aligning effort to ensure that families have the support they need. We will also be working hard to make sure that outcomes for children who are in care are improved. No matter their starting point, we want children physically, mentally and emotionally to thrive. How we achieve this must always be informed by the voices of those who most need our support: children and young people. In order to make a positive change, we need to amplify their voices through increased participation, advocacy and support.

Unfortunately, I was not asked in the estimates committee about those commitments we made to enable that amplification, but I am pleased to have the opportunity now to say that we are committing additional funding to improve advocacy and support for children and young people in care and leaving care, including, amongst other initiatives, providing $800,000 to the CREATE Foundation to grow the voice of children and young people and, with those young people, to look at issues like sibling contact and relationships.

We are providing $1.87 million over four years for the Child and Young Person’s Visitor role. We are working with the Commissioner for Aboriginal Children and Young People to create additional mechanisms for young Aboriginal people to have a voice and provide opportunities for young people in care—or with a care experience—to have a voice through the No Capes for Change committee, and through an additional $3.2 million in post-care services.

We are also focused on better supporting the extraordinary carers who open their hearts and homes and their lives to children and young people. They deserve support and respect and to be heard and valued, and that is why we are proudly investing an additional $200,000 per annum to expand carer advocacy and support services. It is clear that the former government did not take the steps required to support the child protection workforce to do the incredibly difficult work that is required.

Through our efforts and the $128.9 million of investment, as mentioned, in contrast we are working to fill existing vacancies and in doing so to improve staffing ratios. We are developing a workforce plan in consultation with workers and their unions and community organisations to ensure sustainable, safe staffing levels for the future. We intend to initiate a campaign to connect students and other jobseekers with the incredibly important work in child protection.

This government is committed to investing in child protection—in its workers, carers and vulnerable families and in support for the children and young people themselves—as well as to pursuing continuous improvement in the way in which we all work together to keep those most vulnerable safe from abuse and neglect. We will be deepening and intensifying our collective work to improve outcomes for children and keep them safe. As minister, I am determined to move forward with targeted, aligned and active reform that seeks to both respond to the challenges and better protect children and young people.

Amongst many urgent actions required to meet the challenges in the system is the need to develop deeper community engagement with an understanding of the complexity and interconnectedness of issues families face. Our collective endeavour sits squarely in a broader context of complexity and challenge. Meeting these challenges is difficult but, together, meet them we must. I am very proud that through this first budget we are making the investments needed to do this vital work.

As I have said many times in this house, sport and recreation is powerful. It keeps people active and it improves physical, mental and emotional wellbeing. It gives people a wonderful sense of belonging and opportunity to form friendships and enables communities to explore issues that our community and world confront. That is why we are investing in clubs and organisations, including through a $13.2 million commitment to build female facilities at local sporting clubs to encourage more women and girls to become involved in the sport they love.

Through these investments, we can help ensure community members can participate in sport and recreation and enjoy community life through their chosen sport. We also want to make our state the centre of motorsport in Australia, whether it be through local car enthusiast or collector clubs or at a statewide level. We are funding $500,000 per year for local car club grants, including managing the conditional registration scheme in addition to our significant investment to bring back the Adelaide 500 and an $18 million commitment to the motorsport festival.

It is no secret from many words I have said in this place that, for many reasons, I have a long-term passion for addressing inequality and ensuring that women and girls can equally and actively participate in our economy and in every aspect of community life. This government has an incredibly strong focus on addressing the issues that inhibit girls and women from that equal participation and contribute to the horrific scourge of violence against women in our community.

Our government is profoundly committed to creating a state in which gender has no bearing on the opportunities available to you, a state renowned for equal opportunity for girls and women, that empowers women and girls to live their best possible lives and that realises the benefits for all an equal future creates. Our community is made stronger and better through gender equality in every aspect of life. We know that gender inequality is the biggest driver of domestic violence. That is why amongst a range of measures focused on preventing it we will be investing $1 million over three years in the development of both the northern and southern domestic violence prevention and recovery hub to undertake work to support and empower women and raise community awareness about domestic violence.

Unlike what was discovered in previous estimates sessions, where the previous government admitted that no ongoing funding was attached to their safety hubs, we are investing in these new hubs and will continue with existing sites across communities. We are committed to ending domestic, family and sexual violence through legislative change, preventative actions and policies and options for recovery that help women stay safe.

We are establishing a gender pay gap task force, we are seriously backing women and girls in sport through the re-establishment of our South Australian women in sport task force and we have committed to a range of initiatives that support the economic participation of South Australian women, including the $4 million Women in Business program that will provide a suite of programs that will be made available to South Australian female-owned businesses. There is so much to say that I cannot actually finish all my remarks, but I commend this bill and our budget to the house.

Time expired.

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (17:00): As a new member to this place, it was a privilege to go through the estimates process and, especially with my shadow portfolio roles, to unpack some of the different details and aspects that were not readily available when flicking through the budget. I enjoyed the interaction with the ministers. At times, it was very conducive to good answers, but at other times it was far from it.

I was interested in going through the process of the estimates for Primary Industries and Regions SA and the minister's answers to some of the questions put to her. We saw in the budget that there were significant cuts to PIRSA. In trying to unpack some of the reasoning behind that, I was hopeful that there might have been some clear answers, but unfortunately we saw an indirect minister who was not able to clearly define where these cuts were going to be implemented.

We heard there were going to be cuts to four executive staff in PIRSA, including the deputy CEO role, with the other three roles as not yet identified. The deputy CEO role is actually the role the now CEO was in. Effectively, this means that the CEO of PIRSA is now performing the role he previously was as well as the tasks of the chief executive officer, as well as covering for three other executive positions. You cannot tell me that there will not be detrimental outcomes for us as regional South Australians because of these cuts.

We have existing funds that were raided to pay for the government's election commitments, including the Regional Growth Fund, which will now be used for political outcomes. It means that industries and applicants who might have been hoping that this fund was available will be sorely disappointed. In fact, the minister was not even aware of how much of the Regional Growth Fund would actually be remaining once all the election commitments were paid for.

We also saw through the estimates process that the operations of the pastoral unit will now be moved from the department in charge of primary production, into the environment department. Pastoral lands of South Australia are an important production area to the state's economy. Those lands have been well managed by lessees for generations. There has always been a balance made by those people actually on the ground to ensure that the environment is well looked after for future generations, whilst also maintaining a level of productivity. My concern now is if that focus is solely on environmental outcomes, rather than getting the balance right between that production and the environment.

Through the estimates process, I was responsible for the questioning of the Minister for Local Government. As a former local government minister and mayor, I had been hoping that the minister would have a working knowledge of the issues and challenges that are currently facing local government as well as the opportunities for future reforms. Unfortunately, the minister was evasive. He was not aware of the direct impacts of government policy onto local government with a number of questions I brought forward. There are a number of areas of potential reforms of local government that need strong leadership from the local government minister.

We also heard that the minister had received the very important report, entitled The Outback Futures report, highlighting that the report, in the words of the minister,

…gives a comprehensive picture of the issues facing people living in the outback and the challenges in providing services and support to our most remote communities. The government is considering its response to the OCA's final recommendations and will respond in due course, noting the importance of this decision for the future of our outback communities.

He also stated that the Outback Communities Authority (OCA) has focused on the delivery of the Outback Futures project, which is to determine the needs and aspirations of outback communities and how they will be best supported in the longer term.

At the same time as he was saying these words, he also confirmed that there would be a cut to the budget of the Outback Communities Authority. How will the OCA be able to deliver on the very important recommendations made through their report with a severely significantly diminished budget? Sadly, I fear people from our outback communities, who put so much into our state's economy, will be further disadvantaged by this budget cut from the Labor government.

During the estimates process, questions were asked of the environment minister about the arrangements for the Eyre Peninsula desalination plant project. Water is a subject matter that is significant for all of us, on Eyre Peninsula in particular. We have all grown up learning about the importance of the Tod Reservoir as the first significant water source, being the region's first major infrastructure project. We all learnt about the unique distribution network that delivered water across the peninsula, opening up the middle of Eyre Peninsula with a reliable water source, starting at the very south of our region and going all the way up to Ceduna and beyond.

We also learnt about the important underground water aquifer, the network that provides the peninsula's water needs and has for decades. Unfortunately, the water needs of Eyre Peninsula have put significant pressure on these underground water basins. In recognition of this, the previous Liberal government undertook this desalination project to provide for a water source that is not climate dependent and not solely reliant on rainfall for replenishing these aquifers. We cannot underestimate the importance of this project to the people of Eyre Peninsula, the people of my seat of Flinders, and to the significant economic contribution our region makes to the state's economy.

Importantly, after concerns from community and businesses, the former environment minister, David Speirs, made the decision to form the Eyre Peninsula Desalination Project Site Selection Committee. This committee was put together to ensure that local community leadership and businesses were involved in advising the government on the location and arrangements for the project. I was concerned to hear through the estimates process that the now environment minister has yet to meet with the chair of this site selection committee, despite its being one of the most significant projects of her responsibilities; in fact, she had yet to even receive a briefing about the project.

I highlight again to this place that the project to deliver a desalination plant on Eyre Peninsula is incredibly important for the long-term sustainability of the communities and businesses of Eyre Peninsula, both now and into the future. The perspective of the local leadership, which is represented through this committee, is incredibly important, and I urge the minister to engage with them. I also urge the government and SA Water to deliver this project in conjunction with the recommendations from the committee, as there is a risk that Eyre Peninsula will run out of water in the not too distant future. We need a project that is in the right location, that is of adequate size and that has community support.

The trade and investment department is an incredibly important one to our regions and our state, especially with the current challenging worldwide conditions in no small part due to COVID-19. With this in mind, I was surprised by the decision of the government to cut the plan to open a new trade office in Paris. During estimates, the minister highlighted:

Our annual merchandise exports to the EU are some $980 million with our top three markets being Belgium, the Netherlands and then France, and our top exports being canola, wine and almonds.

Taking this into account, I was intrigued that the minister had decided that the best way to deal with these critical European Union markets was not through an EU member or mainland European office but through the existing trade office in London. I hope that this priority signal from the government does not put at risk these key export and trade markets across mainland Europe, which were highlighted by the minister through the estimates process.

During the estimates session with the Minister for Planning, I was again concerned with the words from the minister. He said that a significant proportion of the Planning and Development Fund was being allocated to deliver what he labelled as 'election commitments'. The Planning and Development Fund is put together with moneys that are collected from developers to develop open space across the whole state. It contributes to important programs such as the Places for People Grants, which is a competitive program able to be applied for by councils across the whole state which are looking at investing in strategic open space projects. With all these moneys now going to election commitments in target Labor seats, the rest of the state misses out.

Some of the questions we asked through the estimates process were left unanswered—many of them, indeed. The estimates process is the main opportunity that the opposition has to speak on behalf of their communities and to get real answers about what is in the budget. Going through that process, it was highlighted to me very clearly that we need to make sure that we have a government that is accountable and transparent to our whole state.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:10): I rise to speak on the estimates process, sadly from opposition. It was an interesting time, as has been discussed, where you try to get answers from the government. I am very privileged to be the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, emergency services and regional roads.

In regard to veterans affairs, it was good to quiz Minister Brock about what relationships the government is having with different sections of the veteran community. I certainly will be making sure that I interact with as many groups as possible, hopefully all the groups, involved with veterans affairs over time. It was good, as has been outlined in question time today, to interact with reservists and their employers at the Adelaide Oval last sitting week. We witnessed members of the Army doing a training exercise at Adelaide Oval and, as my brother used to say they were fully bombed up or kitted up with all the gear—vests, helmets, rifles, etc.

Some of the more interesting answers came during some of the emergency services questioning around MFS and CFS. When I was questioning the minister, the member for Cheltenham, around the new Metropolitan Fire Service pumpers that are coming online, he was espousing how great a Labor initiative they were. But I went back and checked because I was sure I was correct: these trucks were actually commissioned during the previous financial year under our government.

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

Mr PEDERICK: Yes, they will be delivered.

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

Mr PEDERICK: No, you have a look at the budget from 2021-22—

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): Order! The member has the call.

Mr PEDERICK: Twelve trucks—12 fire trucks were commissioned in that year. It got even more interesting when I asked where these trucks were manufactured. The minister said they were from a local manufacturer, which the member would know very well, which is Fraser. Fraser Engineering is based in New Zealand. They are built there. Yes, they have a servicing point here in Adelaide, but the trucks are built in New Zealand.

Also related to emergency services was the delivery of new fire trucks to the CFS, and I want to note that there were 63 vehicles that were commissioned under our government. They will be delivered later this year.

These involve nine quick attack vehicles, and they will be going to places such as Cherryville, Laura, Lower Inman Valley, Morgan, Norton Summit, Ashton, Port Victoria, Sellicks, Strathalbyn and Waitpinga. There are 10 type 1.4 tankers (1,000-litre tankers). They will be at Ashbourne, Bridgewater, Echunga, Greenock, Neales Flat, the State Training Centre, Streaky Bay, Swan Reach, Upper Sturt and Waitpinga. The minister made mention that he saw some smiles across the chamber. Well, the old Swan Reach 1.4 tanker was one I served on with some other people from the Mallee in the mopping up of the Kangaroo Island fires in early 2020.

There are 10 type 2.4 (2,000 litre) rescue tankers going to Cowell, Eudunda, Meadows, Mount Pleasant, Orroroo, Padthaway, Parndana, the State Training Centre, Williamstown and Wudinna. There are also 16 type 3.4 tankers (3,000-litre tankers) going to Angaston, Balaklava, Cadell, Coffin Bay, Eden Hills, Kapunda, Keith, Kimba, Littlehampton, McLaren Vale, Mil-Lel, Nairne, Owen, Port Broughton, Port Elliot and Tumby Bay.

Then we get the big ones, the 12type 4.4 (4,000 litre) tankers, going to Aldinga Beach, Brinkworth, Dublin, Haines, MacGillivray, Hamley Bridge, Lucindale, Roseworthy, the State Training Centre, Tailem Bend, Tintinara and Willalooka. There are five—I am not sure if they were in the mix.

Mr Teague interjecting:

Mr PEDERICK: There are 63 trucks, so they might have come through earlier. Five bolt water carriers are going to the Barossa, Caralue, Mid Murray, North Barossa and Victor Harbor, and a rescue vehicle is going to Lobethal—all commissioned under the previous Marshall Liberal government.

As I did during estimates, I will salute all the volunteers and all the administration staff involved in our emergency services. There are many thousands of volunteers. Just the CFS alone has around 13½ thousand. They do a great service to this state, and this country when they are asked to go interstate to fight fires. We must make sure that we keep them sustained and trained appropriately.

I want to pay tribute to chief officer Mark Jones, who is going home. I think I was at his first public event several years ago when he got here to Callington, opening a new training room at the Callington CFS shed. He had his wife, Liz, with him. There was an interesting break in proceedings. I wondered what the commotion was. There was a little lizard darting through the crowd in the room, which caused a little bit of delight amongst the crowd.

It is a tough gig heading up any of the emergency services, and I wish Mark well in his new posting back home in England. I note that during the estimates process, the minister said there will be not just a statewide look for the new chief officer but a national look, as well as an international look for the process going forward.

Another one of my portfolios is regional roads, and I note that the previous Marshall Liberal government worked on 4,800 kilometres of regional roads. There had been a huge backlog as so many regional roads were let go under the previous Labor government. They got rolled back to 100 km/h. That was the easiest thing to do when roads deteriorated—just take 10 kilometres off the speed limit. Some people might not think that is much. I know some of the academics especially say that it is safer at 100 km/h, but I do not know whether many academics are driving 60,000 to 100,000 kilometres a year, as country members do.

You need to get to places every day, every week of the year, apart from when you are here in parliament. For people from country communities, it makes a real difference to productivity. Yes, you have to be safe and you have to be aware, but the projects we instigated, especially across the eight roads that were stipulated in our time, are fantastic. I look at roads like the Ngarkat Highway and the Browns Well Highway between Loxton through to Pinnaroo and down to Bordertown—400 kilometres—and there is a 200-kilometre section of shoulder sealing. It is just fantastic work. They are roads that do not carry a lot of vehicles per day, only about 450 vehicles per day. They are road train routes and vital freight routes, especially for companies like Parilla potatoes at Parilla, which has new packing shed facilities that we assisted with a $2 million Regional Growth Fund grant.

Another project that we put in our budget was to repair, upgrade and paint the Old Murray Bridge. We allocated $36 million, and I soon noticed in the budget that there was an extra $10 million going into that, so it is a $46 million project. The Old Murray Bridge was finished in 1879, a long time ago, and it has been about 32 years since it was painted. There are a lot more environmental concerns about where those paint chips might go when you flick off the paint on the bridge. It reminds me of Ivan Venning, but that is another story. That was a great conversation in the house, but I do not have time to go into it, as it would take up the rest of my time. He had a little interaction with former Minister Conlon. I should get Ivan down there; he would probably save $10 million on the bridge.

That project is much needed. There was a bit of a scare in the community that was perpetuated a little bit around the place: 'It's going to be terrible. The old bridge has to be shut down to one lane with lights and controllers on it for the traffic flow.' It is actually working brilliantly. I try to go over it every time I come in from Coomandook, and the longest I have waited is four minutes. They have done the stats, and it is somewhere around the 8,000 to 9,000 vehicle mark. About 500 more vehicles a day go over the Old Murray Bridge than the Swanport Bridge, which is obviously a heavy freight route through to Adelaide.

It is a great project and it is great to see it is well funded. We began it, and there is a lot of work going in to make sure that it is done properly. It is going to be 18-plus months in the making, but it is vital to keep that link route keeping Murray Bridge joined together. If it had been shut down, with not having the bridge open, it would have been chaos for the community having to go out around Swanport Road, which is a 15-minute diversion, let alone having traffic banked up at the Princes Highway intersection out on the freeway.

I asked questions about the investigation of the South-East links into Adelaide. Multiple routes are being investigated there, so I applaud that. I note that our previous Liberal government alongside the previous federal government put huge amounts of money into projects, whether it was in the Hills or the Truro bypass up on the Sturt Highway. There was $200 million put into the Sturt Highway and $250 million was put into the Hahndorf roadworks to get trucks and heavy vehicles off the main street there.

I also note that there are ongoing investigations into the duplication of the Swanport Bridge, which has $5 million allocated to it. That is sorely needed. That project is linked into the first five kilometres out of Tailem Bend heading south on the Dukes Highway, which involves a railway bridge. As part of the investigation in my questioning, that will be lifted and dual-laned to restart the duplication that has not happened for 40 years on the Dukes Highway.

I heard what was happening in the budget with the north-south connector route being delayed by the current Labor government by at least another year, well past the forward estimates. Major projects include the Dukes Highway, the Sturt Highway and certainly the Port Augusta Highway. The duplication that these roads need is expensive. Both the Sturt Highway and the Dukes Highway are $3 billion each and they are both about the same length—about 190 to 200 kilometres. Those quotes will only go further north as time goes on. We certainly need to see that duplication for productivity into the future.

Another road I have had a little bit to do with for many decades is the Strzelecki Track, and I am hoping to get up there soon. I was up there a couple of years ago, and we instigated the sealing of Strzelecki Track. It is 472 kilometres. It is interesting that during question time—and I just missed what he said, and I thought he said something else—the member from West Torrens said it was a great Labor initiative. Stage I of the upgrade was completed in 2021, which was sections that included 84 kilometres. There are other stages of procurement going on and then planning for the last stages.

This is a vital connect route linking the south through to the Cooper Basin and pastoral lands there and not just that. If you are prepared to go up the dirt road on the Strzelecki Track as it is, you can head through to Queensland on bitumen now, on Adventure Way. Near Innamincka was being set up for bituminising two years ago, so that 30 kilometres between Innamincka and the Queensland border would be done, and from then on it is bitumen all the way to Brisbane. It is certainly good to see that work ongoing, and I certainly will not let the member from West Torrens take credit for it.

We need to make sure that we have plenty of money spent on regional roads. I did ask the Minister for Regional Roads what defined a regional road. I do not know whether someone thought I was setting a trap, but the member from West Torrens intervened and said they are all interconnected between urban and country. Yes, they do interconnect, but it is interesting that, when you go through the budget papers and look at what is defined as a regional road, it starts at Crafers, and I guess the other end would be just north of Gepps Cross, so there is a fair bit of the state serviced by regional roads under that definition.

I note that hundreds of millions of dollars have also been allocated to manage motorway projects and other projects on the freeway, which do need to be done. There is a bit of conversation at times about trucks on the freeway, but it is a freight route, and 40 per cent of the trucks that come down that freight route originate locally and are much needed—whether it is for bulky goods, food or other supplies—for people in the state.

Acknowledging that, it is amazing talking to people about how freight is going around the northern freight route, the northern bypass as it is called. Anything above a B-double—whether it is a B-triple, a B-quad, road train, two-trailer road train or in AB-double, which is essentially two long trailers and a short trailer—all have to go around the top. There are more companies doing that. Collins are running B-triples and other companies are running B-quads. Yes, it is further but there is more productivity per trip, so we need to make sure that we get all these upgrades done moving into the future.

I will certainly keep the government to account on what roads need to be upgraded back to 110 km/h. Many roads within 100 kilometres of Adelaide were downgraded during the time of the previous Labor government, and I look at roads around my way, whether it is roads linking Wellington through to Langhorne Creek and Strathalbyn, whether it is the link between Murray Bridge and Mannum, which will be very heavily used by the end of the year, when Thomas foods open up their meatworks there.

Getting back to emergency services, I note that another project in my electorate started by us, initiated by the member for Heysen, is the new SES shed in Strathalbyn, which is well underway. It was started under us. It will be finished in the not too distant future. It is a great service to the community.

We have some vital health needs in the area that need addressing area. One we have asked questions on in the house and made comment about is the emergency department at Strathalbyn. Yes, it is linked with aged care, but it must reopen to service not just people in Strathalbyn but also people from outer areas, whether it is Milang, Clayton or Langhorne Creek. We need to get it operating again for that community.

Another thing that both the member for Heysen and I are very keen on is to see where Kalimna is going. It was aged care, but the former Labor government basically kicked everyone out. It has been going through a long process—which we started—of evaluating what to do with this site. It needs to be a facility linked to the care of our older citizens. All members on this side are keeping a close eye on that because this was land that was bought by the local community through fundraising, as were the buildings on it. So there is lots to keep our eye on. It was an interesting estimates period.

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (17:30): I welcome the opportunity to speak more on the budget as part of the Appropriation Bill now that it has been through the estimates process. The estimates process gives all members of parliament, particularly those sitting on the committees, the opportunity to question various areas of the budget. I had the opportunity to sit in on the estimates committees involving the Premier, involving aspects of education via the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, as well as energy and mining, and finally questioning areas of the budget around defence and space.

As I said in my Appropriation Bill speech prior to estimates, I was really looking at investigating with more scrutiny areas revolving around the economy. I think I said in that speech that there was a lot of emphasis in the campaign from this government around health and not so much discussion around the drivers of what is going to grow the economy and support what is a significant spending budget that we have seen here.

Even before the election, you could see the economic headwinds coming out of COVID and the challenges involved around that as a result of the impacts on supply chains, and what those mean for inflation, and just changes in the workforce because of COVID. Since the election, certainly inflation has continued to surge and the cost of living has become really important. Added onto that is the war in Ukraine, which again is disrupting not only our supply chains but also cost of living, in terms of real issues around food and energy sources.

Inflation is surging. The March figures showed up at 5.1 per cent, and that is having a genuine impact on families and businesses in South Australia. The Reserve Bank in this environment are looking to increase interest rates to dampen inflation and get it back into the band they say is their target—that 2 per cent to 3 per cent band. We have seen the Federal Reserve in the US also lift interest rates very sharply. It is quite stark. Over probably nearly two decades, we have grown up with very low trending down interest rates; now they are jumping right up, and just today the Reserve Bank increased interest rates by half a per cent—by 500 basis points—and all that is impacting on businesses and families in South Australia.

There was not much in the budget for businesses in South Australia to help grow the economy. We know that growing the economy will help with those headwinds and it will help with continued employment because, of course, cost of living is a factor. Having employment is even more important to people to be able to pay their bills. Nothing I saw in the estimates process really changed my opinion on that at all.

Compare that with the previous four years of Liberal government, when there were structural initiatives to help with those cost-of-living costs—whether it be for household business, and I spoke previously about payroll tax and removing that for small business, with any business with a payroll under $1.5 million not having to pay payroll tax; a reduction in the emergency services levy, that remission reintroduced to the order of around $90 million per year; and also water rates, where changing the valuation of that asset base brought down a cost to households around $200, with the cost to businesses even more and in the order of around $1,300. These are all important measures which were put in place and which this budget takes advantage of, thankfully we say. But where is the next step? We do not see it.

I will talk a bit later in my contribution around electricity prices and the effect they are having on the cost of living. As I have said previously, the last four years of the Liberal government saw electricity prices come down by $421 for the average electricity bill. Again, that is now starting to trend up, and that is really concerning. Those four years saw employment really take off, with over 41,300 jobs created in South Australia over the term. At the same time, the economy was able to make its way through very challenging conditions relating to COVID, to the point where, compared with other states—and it is fair to compare us with other states—we did have the fastest growing economy in the nation, at 3.9 per cent.

All this good work has put the budget in the position where, with all the headwinds that are faced, it gave strong GST receipts, increases in stamp duty receipts and increases in the mining space as well, which has gone some way to paying for $3.1 billion of spending that is in this budget. Of that spending, I would like to take a little time to look into that. During the estimates process with the Premier, the leader asked questions around some of those spending programs. One of those, of course, is the grants to sporting clubs, how much was spent on those club grants and which electorates those grants found their way into.

In fact, it has been found that over $84 million has been put towards these grants, and it has been said that they are election commitments. What was interesting around that is how much of that $84 million found its way into the electorate of Morphett and how many sporting clubs in Morphett received that. The answer is zero dollars. This is shameful for the constituents of Morphett, seeing all that largesse with no consideration given to the sporting clubs in Morphett. In fact, an ABC analysis backs that up and shows that that is not uncommon for an electorate held by a Liberal member of parliament. The ABC analysis showed that, of the 72 sporting grants announced in the state budget, 69 were made to seats the Labor Party held or gained in the election, so no grants for Morphett.

In terms of the process around that, usually these grants have to be scrutinised by the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing, but they have confirmed that they have not assessed these $84 million in grants for sports club upgrades; in fact, the normal processes have been bypassed. In election commitments, there are commitments made to various community clubs and to sporting organisations. Certainly, after the event it should be beholden on good governance that checks and balances are put in place that these grants can be of support to the club, that there is agreement from the landowner and the like; in fact, that was not the case here.

In terms of Glenelg, Glenelg East, Glenelg South, Glenelg North, Camden Park, Novar Gardens, Morphettville, Glengowrie and Park Holme, there is nothing for their clubs. They are not worthy of the attention of this government. It is a real missed opportunity and something that is disappointing for those clubs. Again, if I compare the previous four years of Liberal government, they were certainly not forgotten under the Liberal government.

Some transformative upgrades were made to some of the great local clubs in Morphett. As I mentioned before, there was money that went to the unisex change rooms at Morphettville Park Football Club. It is a fantastic club, and it has a fantastic women's football program and is one of the pioneers of women's football here in South Australia. The women are able to work and play alongside their male counterparts. That has really helped with numbers at the club and really helped with its success. In 2021, both the senior men and senior women won premierships in their divisions.

Another club that benefited from the former Liberal government was Glenelg Football Club. In conjunction with the federal government and the City of Holdfast Bay, they were provided with over $480,000 towards a fantastic unisex change room that sits at the southern end of the football club. That has been a fantastic addition to the club, which is growing in numbers. Its female football program is really benefiting from it.

I was at their club champion awards only a few weeks ago, and I congratulate Jess Bates on her fantastic season and winning the best and fairest for Glenelg for the second year in a row. The club spoke about what an absolute boost it has been for the whole female team to have those facilities right there. They were in a besser block building, which had one toilet and now with these new change rooms there are multiple toilets. The girls do not have to line up before a game, and they are really appreciative of that. They give credit to that in terms of what was again another fantastic year for them in the women's league.

Other clubs to benefit were PHOS Camden Netball Club, where money has been allocated to help them relocate to the same site as the PHOS Camden Football Club. They spent many years separated by Sturt Creek, away from each other. Now they are looking forward very soon to be joined up. Usually, the girls play netball there, with their brothers or sisters playing football, and now the parents can be at the one location.

That is some of the important funding which the former Liberal government provided and which is missing from Morphett in this budget, and the focus of budget for the constituents of Morphett is really chalk and cheese in comparison. It is certainly clear that this Malinauskas Labor government is not governing for all people in South Australia.

Previously, I spoke about some of the areas of my shadow ministry I am involved with. I did not get to speak so much about defence and space, so I take some opportunity to do that now. Defence and space are important economic sectors here in South Australia. We are known as the defence state, and it has really been a third pillar of our state's economy that has grown over the last century to take its place amongst energy and mining and also agriculture.

Closely aligned to that is space. There are massive opportunities in space because of the change in how space is able to be operated. Because of the miniaturisation, it has become much more amenable and available to commercial operators now. In fact, that is where a lot of the driving technology changes and innovation are occurring. Again, that really was a key focus of the former Liberal government, in terms of taking that opportunity for what is a new growth sector and making sure that South Australia leads the charge and be not only the nation's defence capital but also the nation's space capital.

In this budget, I see the good work of the former Liberal government just being taken on and not really added to. In fact, as I will get to in questioning, I have concerns around the appetite of this government to continue that momentum. We know that, while you can be at the forefront for a period of time, there are certainly other jurisdictions and other nations wanting to take our place.

I think the space sector is a fantastic opportunity for South Australia. We have Lot Fourteen, which is again a great initiative of the former Liberal government. It has attracted so many companies to South Australia, international companies bringing with them big, globally facing careers into South Australia. One of the key magnets of attraction in the Lot Fourteen precinct is the Australian Space Agency. That is really a credit to the fact that South Australia is seizing the opportunities in commercial space, hence the reason for its being located here. Of course, that is a government body, so it is there to regulate things, but having the expertise there attracts other like-minded businesses.

One of those businesses is Southern Launch and their ambition to perform a commercial launch in South Australia. They have done the test launch site at Koonibba, and they are looking to do space orbital launches from Whaler's Way in and around the southern tip of Eyre Peninsula. In estimates, we were able to find out that there are opportunities for launches to continue there. The Space Agency is waiting to give the permit for the next launch. A test launch was to be done there just before Christmas last year, so we are looking forward to that continuing.

Another great area of opportunity for South Australia is the Australian Space Park and what it could bring to South Australia. It would set up a Common User Facility co-located with some significant tenants; some are well known in South Australia and others have been attracted to what is going on here. Fleet Space Technologies is a fantastic South Australian success story. We also have Q-CTRL looking to set up here from New South Wales, which is a fantastic opportunity, as well as the other companies.

Again, from questioning the minister around what is going on there, it is not clear how fast they are moving. At the same time, yes, that Australian Space Park was able to take the opportunity of federal funding from the Modern Manufacturing Initiative but, likewise, New South Wales had a collaboration that was able to attract some federal funding from the Modern Manufacturing Imitative. Two space satellite manufacturing and space-related manufacturing facilities came out of that program. We want to make sure that South Australia retains its nation-leading status to continue to attract companies here. It is not clear that is the case.

Defence is also a really important area for South Australia, being the defence capital. There are some really good highlights during the 2021-22 year around the Collins submarines full cycle docking, the fact that the Boeing 737 deep maintenance facility will be located at Edinburgh, the continued full occupancy of the defence and space landing pad at Lot Fourteen and the ability to attract companies to set up a presence in South Australia in those two fields. Finally, there is the establishment of the South Australian nuclear-powered submarine task force to support what will be the Australian government's task force initiatives to really look into what is required to have maximum local industry content in South Australia for the nuclear-powered submarine program.

One of the key issues in relation to this program and also to the big shipbuilding program—in fact, all defence-related activities in South Australia—is around workforce, that is, attracting skilled workers to South Australia, retaining skilled workers and making sure they are not attracted to other adjacent industries. The challenge, which was clear from estimates, is the cuts and the efficiency dividends slated for non-frontline departments. This is where it is starting to hit home in areas which are vital to South Australia to grow its economy to be able to have a skilled workforce.

In the innovation industry and science department, under questioning to the minister it was revealed that there were cuts of $11 million in this financial year but then there was uncertainty around what the cuts will be in the remaining out years of the budget. This $11 million was out of a total department efficiency of $20 million, then these department efficiencies continue on with about $16.5 million targeted for 2025-26. So you can guesstimate—and the minister said, while not committing to anything—that that trend of cuts from $11 million would probably flow through to those out years. It really begs the question: what emphasis is there on these workforce issues which are so important for making sure South Australia is still at the forefront?

Other questions revealed the minister has not yet met with her federal counterparts, the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Defence Industry, and I think there are concerns around the effort that is being put in to this department of space and defence. It is an important one for South Australia and it will certainly be my role to hold the minister to account in those areas.

Sitting extended beyond 18:00 on motion of Hon. S.C. Mullighan.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Treasurer) (17:51): Fear not, fellow members, I have changed my ways. We will not be here until 10pm. I just want to make a few concluding remarks on the Appropriation Bill. Can I thank the members for their contributions and their approach to the budget and the estimates process. It is always of interest to me to hear the way in which members across the chamber make contributions on the Appropriation Bill. We heard the member for Hammond and the member for Flinders reflecting on how the budget affects their electorates, and it has been similar with other members, and we have had ministers and shadow ministers who have made more particular remarks around portfolio areas that they have a keen interest in.

As I said when I introduced the bill to the house, it is clearly an important occasion for the government but an important line in the sand for the new Malinauskas Labor government committed to delivering all of our election commitments. I am very pleased that we have done that, trying to restore some confidence in the community in government, particularly after a trying last two years. I also want to thank all the staff who were involved in supporting the estimates process, in particular the staff from my department, the Department of Treasury and Finance, and also all the other agencies.

Can I thank the chamber staff, as well, and also Hansard and the whip. Thank you to everyone who made what is a very arduous process function as well as it did. I thank the members opposite as well as the chairs of the committees for managing the process quite well.

I want to make a few brief remarks on some of the issues that have been raised about the budget and briefly respond to them. As I said during question time, I find it absolutely fascinating that the opposition is choosing to spend its time criticising the government for keeping its election commitments, particularly keeping its election commitments to local communities. I also find it absolutely remarkable that the cheerleader in that respect is the member for Hartley. The member for Hartley made a contribution earlier today during the grievance debate where he criticised the government. I will paraphrase by saying that the election commitments, and I quote:

…bypassed a very strict standard assessment process for these grants. No third party laid eyes on these projects. There was absolutely no assessment undertaken—not by the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing, not by anyone. Instead, it was assessed by none other than the Labor Party before the election, and that is just not good enough. What is worse, members and ministers of this government hold positions of high authority at these clubs. Not only do they hold positions of high authority but they have been directly involved in making these decisions.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, member for Hartley. Of course, the member for Hartley is an aspiring politician. Remember what Bob Hawke said about what it takes to be a successful politician: you need ambition, and you need talent, and certainly the member for Hartley is ambitious. He has committed exactly the offence with which he charges members of the government.

On his own Facebook page in January, there he is standing at one of the sporting clubs in the electorate of Hartley, to which he has a close affiliation, making a funding commitment. Then shortly after the election, in July 2018, he is standing with the former Premier, the member for Dunstan, and also the former member for Gibson, Corey Wingard, holding what purports to be a cheque. It is a large cheque with the official Government of South Australia logo on it, with the words 'Government of South Australia' in the official font and colour and typeface. It is a cheque to the amount of, and remarkably is signed by the member for Hartley and by Corey Wingard.

That is remarkable because these cheques, according to the member for Hartley's Facebook post, were for the Hectorville Sports and Community Club Incorporated and the Athelstone Football Club, or the Raggies, as he says they are known out there. It only takes a cursory look at the member for Hartley's declaration of interests to this place to point out that not only does he have affiliations with these organisations but he is the vice-patron of the Hectorville Football Club.

The member for Hartley comes in here criticising a vice-patron of a hockey club, which is not even located in my electorate, and there he is having done exactly the same thing—although not exactly the same thing; it is worse because he has purported to provide this organisation with a signed document that will confer the value of the money promised therein. He has given them a fake cheque—a fake cheque! To think that this person at that time was the Speaker of this place and then he was to be a minister of the Crown, and he is doling out fake cheques. Now I know where Rob Lucas got it from. It seems as though we have a party of counterfeiters. It is absolutely extraordinary.

I know we can be unkind to the member for Hartley, and there are all sorts of uncomplimentary references to memories of goldfish and all that sort of thing, but perhaps the member for Hartley could reflect on his own behaviour before he comes into this place or goes out to the media and starts casting aspersions on the character of other members. He could think very carefully about his own behaviour in this regard. That is the first thing.

The Minister for Health has pointed out the extraordinary front of those opposite and the crocodile tears over the efforts made to repair the health system. Remember, we had all the promises in the world before the 2018 election. There was all of the criticism of the former Labor government and that they were going to fix it. What did we see in the first budget? More than $40 million of additional cuts to the health department, beds closed.

While facilities were expanded, they were expanded at the cost of beds, exacerbating the situation and leading to some of the circumstances that we find ourselves in now. So what did we do? We came forward with the budget this year to put $2.4 billion of additional resources into our health system—not a bit more or a lot more, but an exponential increase on what had previously been provided by way of new budget investment in previous budgets.

Those opposite spend their question time saying, 'Health is a problem. What are you doing about health?' The problem with the opposition is that they are struggling to find their line and length in opposition. To use a cricket analogy, it is like seeing someone with the accuracy of Shaun Tait bowling at the speed of Nathan Lyon: it is all over the place and, as we have seen to date, there is no wonder they are getting so little traction. That is not to say that those opposite sometimes do not raise important and valid points about how money is being spent and where it is being spent.

Given how often they tell the house—and I genuinely believe them—I am sure that those opposite care about the initiatives, programs and investments that have been made in their local communities, whether it is metro or regional, or programs that have been provided more broadly in government, they should be very pleased that this government is almost without exception continuing all those investments and doing more on top of that. The member for Morphett is right: we have had the capacity to do that. We have had the capacity to deliver all our election commitments and do more because we have had greater capacity due to increasing revenues, and that is a good thing.

Not only are we implementing our election agenda but we are not trashing the programs and initiatives put in place by the previous government. We are making savings, absolutely, because again like the commitments we made to local communities, they are our election commitments. If you are going to spend money in one place, you cannot assume that there will always be a flood and a deluge of additional revenue coming into the budget to enable that to happen. If you are going to spend more in one area, you have to make savings elsewhere, and that is the discipline of government.

The previous government had a policy of running an ongoing efficiency dividend in agencies, and of course there will be discussions about what the right quantum of that is, but that is an appropriate thing to do because it places pressure, not just on agencies but on ministers and the cabinet, to constantly re-evaluate their spending. If they want to spend more money on a new program or a new project, something that has not previously been funded, then we have to look at what is already being funded in government to see if efficiencies can be made.

That is appropriate budget management. I have to say once again: spare us the crocodile tears about the extent of some of the savings being sought in this budget. Those opposite, including those who sat in cabinet when these decisions were being made, when budgets were being decided and budgets were being presented to this house, do not have a leg to stand on. The quantum of savings those opposite promised and sought in their budgets, particularly in the first and the second budget after the 2018 election, were vastly above what we have outlined today.

The Leader of the Opposition complained about efficiencies in the environment department. Last financial year, he sought more than $16 million in that year of new savings from his agency. Do not take my word for it; it is in the budget papers: Budget Paper 3, 2018-19 budget savings. It is there. PIRSA complained about savings in the primary industries department. They must be Star Wars fans over there because it was lightsabers at 10 paces when it came to the PIRSA budget under the former Liberal government.

While we have quarantined areas like health, education, emergency services, courts, TAFE and police from savings, you cannot say that was the approach of those opposite. They did not mind if they were frontline service delivery agencies or central agencies; they waded into all of them looking for savings. We are in a very different point in our state's progress with a different government that has different priorities.

We will not be administering the budget in the same way that they did, remarkably taking the axe to agency budgets while at the same time doubling the state's debt before the pandemic and then increasing it even further in response to the pandemic, running record budget deficits not because of the stimulus program but because of sloppy financial management.

You cannot tell me, Mr Speaker, that those opposite can justify a $20 billion increase in the state's debt position while trumpeting that their economic stimulus program was worth only $4 billion. Where is the other $16 billion? I tell you what: it is not in further improvements to the north-south corridor and it is not in improvements to those regional roads, which the member for Hammond quite rightly pointed out are priorities for the state, because those projects largely have not been underway or completed let alone delivered.

That means the former Liberal government racked up debt through sloppy financial management, running deficits, cranking up the debt, and South Australians have been left nothing—nothing—to show for it. This is a good budget. I commend it to the house and I appreciate the support of all members.

Motion carried.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Treasurer) (18:05): I move:

That the remainder of the bill be agreed to.

Motion carried.

Third Reading

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Treasurer) (18:05): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

At 18:06 the house adjourned until Wednesday 6 July 2022 at 10:30.