Election Commitments

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (14:28): My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. Can the minister inform the house of the Malinauskas government's approach to infrastructure election commitments, and can the minister comment on any alternative approaches?

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for Energy and Mining) (14:28): Buckle up. Yes, sir, I can. Our approach is simple: we engage with local communities, we listen to local communities, we carefully consider the views of local communities and then we attempt to swiftly deliver.

An example of this is the consultation on the Adelaide Aquatic Centre. We promised to commence consultation within 100 days of our election, and we did so. Now we have a location. An overwhelming majority of the people we consulted with from the local community chose the site. They had a say. We started the conversation with the public, we considered the valuable feedback, we made a decision that confirmed the location aligned with the public's anticipation of where that infrastructure would be built.

Contrast that with an alternative approach: the basketball stadium—a project no-one thought of, no-one wanted and, of course, according to a leaked report I have received from internal Liberal Party submissions prepared by long-time Liberal Party members, it was not explained effectively to the public.

Contrast that with another of our election commitments, where we had paused the James Road-Old Belair Road infrastructure projects those opposite sought to impose on the good people of Waite without adequate and considerate consultation. We are undertaking that consultation with the local member of parliament to hear what their views are.

We don't propose infrastructure without consulting on it. We don't announce a centrepiece policy like, I don't know, GlobeLink—a proposal that the very industry it was set to serve opposed. A proposal that the Liberal Party members' report states was, and I quote, 'supposed to be fully costed', but, despite those claims that it had a very good business case that existed prior to the election, a government-commissioned KPMG report found that the benefits of GlobeLink were 'limited'.

Of course, and I quote from this report, 'the cancellation of this election commitment cost the Marshall government economic credibility very early on in their term of office'. Yes, it did. Then we come to my favourite piece of infrastructure—Majors Road.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I was convinced in the lead-up to the 2018 election that this was something we had missed. After I saw the Facebook video of someone young, energetic, with a slightly different temperament from the one he has today, out there arguing without one reference to any Disney character at all the importance of the Majors Road on/off ramp and it being his number one priority—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Number one priority. I think you listened to your Treasurer and worked out that you couldn't get what you wanted. In contrast, the leaked Liberal report talking about the Hove level crossing, it got sent to a lot of concerned Liberals. A lot of concerned Liberals have it. It notes, 'To announce a solution with such fanfare and then cancel it really rankled the people in the southern suburbs.' It goes further to say:

People felt unable to trust the Marshall Liberal government, and it certainly contributed to the big swing against the Liberal Party in the seat of Gibson, which was once considered a safe Liberal seat.

I can go on—the right-hand turn to trams, abandoned; GlobeLink, abandoned; Hove level crossing, abandoned; demolishing the Waite Gatehouse: why would they bother to do this?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! There is a point of order, which may be 98 or rather—

Mr TEAGUE: It's just time.

The SPEAKER: Time has expired. Very well.