Advertising Value Equivalency Methodology

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:09): My question is to the Minister for Tourism. Did the minister, her staff or anyone in government ask any questions or raise any concerns about the use of advertising value equivalency methodology prior to yesterday?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON (Ramsay—Minister for Tourism, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (15:10): Obviously, I was made aware that some FOIs had been requested in this field, but I think people have been asking about advertising value equivalent. In fact, the absolute hypocrisy of you because you have raised it for some time and you have used it consistently, as I said, for 'old mate' and Sports Illustrated. This was a regularly used methodology, so why wouldn't we use that going forward? I think, though—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hammond continues to interject concerning, as I understand it, 'old mate'. Well, old mate, it's time for you to go—137A for the remainder of question time. It is time for you to go.

The honourable member for Hammond having withdrawn from the chamber:

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That's why I instructed SATC not to use AVE further. When we look at the $8.3 million, can I tell you the best story here. I know we have talked a lot about major events, and they have been brilliant, but it's actually regional tourism. Regional tourism now is 48¢ in the dollar.

An honourable member: Regions matter.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Regions matter. South Australians discovered their own backyard. In fact, we are just shy of—

Mr Telfer interjecting:

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: How would you know? You never go to anything. We are just shy—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: No-one was there this morning—none of you.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You don't know what you're talking about.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: There are interjections to my left and right. Minister!

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Florey is on a final warning, the member for Badcoe is recognised for her first warning and there were numerous interjections to my left.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: This is a story that I want to keep talking about. Just this morning, I released our agritourism—

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Point of order, sir.

The SPEAKER: There is a point of order under 134—

The Hon. N.D. Champion interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Taylor is warned. There is a point of order under 134, which I will hear from the member for Morialta.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Thank you, sir: standing order 98. The question was simple and direct and unrelated to what the minister is now debating about.

The SPEAKER: There is some force in the point of order that has been raised with me. I remind the minister of standing order 98 and bring her to the substance of the question.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think the question goes back to what I answered before. I asked the SATC for review because questions had been asked about this unique publicity event, and—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister has the call. Members, a minister can answer a question in any way that they choose, provided it falls within the standing orders.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Obviously, we looked at several different ways of analysing and capturing this data of which AVE, a commonly used independent analysing methodology, was one. During the review, we talked about what the recommendations are going forward, and I think one of the key parts about it is we need to capture and monitor performance in a better way.

Since that time, when that publicly released review was out, that conversation has been taking place between SATC and me, and we will continue to do it. We made that decision and it came to fruition when I went public yesterday and informed people that I have instructed that we won't use it going forward. But in the time that I have let me go back to what's most important here. What's most important—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: —is the $8.3 million that we received—

Mr Telfer interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Flinders is called to order. The minister has the call.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: —and the role that the regions have played within it.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Point of order, sir.

The SPEAKER: The member for Morialta on a point of order.

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: I think the minister has indicated she has concluded her answer and so I seek the call.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: She hasn't? Okay, in that case standing order 98: debate.

The SPEAKER: Very well. Are you withdrawing your point of order, member for Morialta?

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER: Standing order 98: debate. I misunderstood the minister when she sat down.

The SPEAKER: I see. The Treasurer may wish to address me on the same point of order.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: I actually rise on another point of order, and that is that the conduct of the deputy leader offends standing order 131. It is a practice of his to continually seek to interrupt members while they are on their feet—in particular, when they are trying to provide answers to the house during question time.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: He does it based on a bogus point of order. I ask that you call him to order or worse.

The SPEAKER: To dispose of the standing orders consecutively: 98 from the member for Morialta, I will direct the minister to come to the substance of the question. I observe that the minister has given considerable context, and we are now some way through the question; in relation to 131 raised by the Treasurer, members will know that the standing orders prevent interruption:

A Member may not interrupt another Member who is speaking except—

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! It continues:

1. to call attention to a point of order, or

2. to call attention to the lack of a quorum, or

3. to move a motion that is permitted by Standing Orders to be moved at any time.

I will keep the standing order closely in mind.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I can't speak more clearly than I have already. Questions were asked and concerns were raised. We did the evaluation and that outlined several measures, and it included AVE because that was a standard measure analysed independently. It was used consistently by the opposition when they were in government. I had no doubt to say, 'Why wouldn't we use this?'

But when we looked at the evaluation, we made some recommendations for monitoring performance. The conversations go forward that the type of data that this was collecting, so when you looked at the Sports Illustrated in 2019 the same figure was calculated in the same way. I don't think it's a good capture of data because I think what we should be doing is talking about South Australia in a positive way.

We know that people are talking about South Australia more in the past year than they have for the past 10 years. We are in a great space, and events and tourism have played a very strong role in this area. We know that we have a great opportunity for AUKUS going forward. We know that hydrogen is something that's incredibly exciting for building forward. My point is—

The SPEAKER: The minister's time has expired. I am turning to the member for Elder. It's only the third government question for the day.