Community Infrastructure Grant Program

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (14:44): As a supplementary, does the Treasurer stand by his answer? With your leave, and that of the house, I will explain, sir.

The SPEAKER: Very well. It must be the answer to the question that was provided on notice, as we understand it, member for Colton. Very well.

Mr COWDREY: As the opposition understands it, we were provided an answer to a question on notice that stated that the $50,000 provided to Eyre to There Aviation company was funded through the Community Infrastructure Grant Program managed by the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

The SPEAKER: Here again we run into some difficulties because the proposition is put essentially as either an argument or an opinion, but a device of leave to introduce facts has been used. Can I remind members to my left as to the standing orders. I am going to permit the question because I see that the Treasurer arose and wishes to answer.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Treasurer) (14:45): To be fair to the member for Colton, I undertook to take the question on notice, so I stand by that commitment. What I think the member for Colton is seeking, or was seeking, was, firstly, an understanding of which agency it came from and in particular—and this is I think where his interest perhaps really lies; I am happy to be corrected—whether it came out of a particular grant program or grant line pre-existing.

I think this gets to the basis of some of the issues and concerns which are being promulgated by those opposite. There has been an ongoing attempt to conflate the delivery of our election commitments into some sort of process where a pre-existing grant program, which is open to the community, receives bids, is assessed ostensibly on a competitive basis, decisions are recommended by the department according to guidelines and then a decision is made. Of course—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, member for Florey! Member for Colton! The Treasurer has the call.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Of course, in the past there have been occasions where there have been serious concerns about that going awry. Indeed, a few years ago we raised serious concerns that when it came to a grant program—I think was called the grassroots sporting grant program, or something similar to that—run by the previous Liberal government, where 12 of the 13 grants in an open, competitive round, with clear guidelines, happened to go to Liberal electorates. But let's be clear—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —the difference—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Treasurer has the call.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Let's be clear, Mr Speaker—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Morialta is on three warnings. The Treasurer has the call.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Let's be clear, because these efforts to conflate the delivery of election commitments entirely separate to and entirely different from pre-existing grant programs—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —which are managed by the department, which are opened on a periodic basis to the community with the delivery of our election commitments, that is completely wrong. The only reason—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —they continue to deliberately conflate and misrepresent this process—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Morialta!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —is to pursue a political red herring to try to accuse us of the practice that they were guilty of—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Chaffey!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —when they were in government over the last four years.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Schubert! Member for Hammond!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: I am very pleased to say that is exactly what we have not done. We have not engaged in the same conduct that the very verbal member for Morialta and his cabinet colleagues appeared to do when they were in government. We deliberately made these election commitments so that they were completely separate to pre-existing grant programs of government of agencies within government so that we would be delivering a much greater amount—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Morialta!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —of community and sporting infrastructure investment across South Australia. That's what we did. When the member for Colton asks did we take it out of an existing grant program that had guidelines, this was an election commitment—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Colton!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —and it was made separate to and different to—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Florey!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: My answer was to take it on notice.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Chaffey is warned. The Treasurer has the call.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Why are you deputy? You do nothing.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: You turn up, you get the cash, you get driven home—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Morialta knows better.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —you can't get a question, you don't do any media.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Why are you deputy?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Why are you deputy?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Chaffey is on two warnings. The member for Morialta is on three warnings—and I must say that is a most generous interpretation of the warning system. The member for Elder has the call.