House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Motions Motions AUKUS AUKUS Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. D.J. Speirs: 1.	That in the opinion of this house, a joint committee be established to inquire into and report on matters relating to South Australia’s contribution to the AUKUS agreement, and particularly to consider— (a)	how to ensure that all submarines are delivered on schedule; (b)	education and training initiatives to build the future workforce; (c)	the role of the South Australian industry; (d)	opportunities from emerging technologies; (e)	the progress of task forces and working groups; (f)	interstate and international partnerships; and (g)	any other relevant matters. 2.	That in the event of a joint committee being appointed, the House of Assembly shall be represented thereon by three members, of whom two shall form a quorum of assembly members necessary to be present at all sittings of the committee. 3.	That a message be sent to the Legislative Council transmitting the foregoing resolution and requesting its concurrence thereto. (Continued from 4 May 2023.) The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER House of Assembly Morialta Deputy Leader of the Opposition The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:02): I rise to speak on the motion before the house, which is to establish a select committee on the AUKUS agreement. This committee, proposed by the Leader of the Opposition and supported in previous debate by the bipartisan shadow minister for defence industries, the member for Morphett, deserves the support of this house. This motion deserves the bipartisan support of the house because this issue is too important for South Australia for petty partisan politics to play any part. Indeed, the success of the AUKUS agreement is tremendously important for Australia's national security. To successfully deliver Australia's part of the AUKUS agreement requires an immense effort from our state. The opportunity presented by the AUKUS agreement to our state, in terms of its economic activity and opportunities for our young people, is potentially transformational. The importance of this cannot be overstated. It was tremendously important for our economy and our defence industries when South Australia won the opportunity to build the submarines, and indeed previous surface vessels, in the past. Yet the importance and significance of those deals and those achievements is rendered small in comparison to the opportunities that the AUKUS agreement presents, just as the AUKUS agreement is tremendously important for Australia's national security. We cannot mess this up. If any of us were to put political opportunism or ambition ahead of the national interest and the state interest in relation to this matter, it would be a grievous error and history will judge such a government or such a member poorly. The opposition has tendered this suggestion. We raised it with the government ahead of doing so. We seek the government's support. We still hope to have the government's support, and we hope to have it today because this work is actually starting now. It is critical that it starts now. However, I raise a couple of issues, which the Premier himself has raised as arguments, as to why the Labor Party and the government should support this motion and should support it today. The Premier on a number of occasions has given quite appropriate speeches and answers to questions in relation to matters relating to AUKUS. He has talked, as I have just done, about the significance of the arrangement, the importance for our national security, the importance for our future in South Australia, and the fact that this is not a matter that is going to be the responsibility of one government to deliver. This is going to be a matter that will be critically important for South Australia for decades to come. It will be a generational matter. It will surpass the lifetime of this government, whether this government lasts for another three years, as I hope, or for another seven years, as they may hope. There will be a range of governments that will be responsible for overseeing South Australia's involvement in delivering the opportunities presented by the AUKUS agreement. A parliamentary committee to have oversight of these matters will give continuity, and it will give the opportunity for both sides of the parliament to make a contribution. It will give an opportunity for the government of the day to be supported by His Majesty's Loyal Opposition in having oversight of those matters, to be a testing ground for government plans and to keep the Public Service supported through parliamentary oversight. It will ensure that both sides of politics are invested in the solutions and that the solutions being presented by government are understood by both sides of politics so that when there is a change of government—whenever that may be and at whichever stage in the generation of the AUKUS project that may be—there will be people who already have experience and understanding of the issues. The committee is proposed to particularly consider how to ensure that the submarines are delivered on schedule, education and training initiatives to build the future workforce, the role of South Australian industry, opportunities from emerging technologies, the progress of task forces and working groups, and interstate and international partnerships. It is proposed that members from this house—three members from the assembly, presumably two government members and an opposition member—and members from the Legislative Council as well be appointed. This is not an opportunity for the government to lose control of the committee. We are quite open to the government having the numbers, if that helps them out in any way. We are quite open to suggestions if they wish to add terms of reference or edit terms of reference. We have said this along the way. We look forward to the government, hopefully, putting the state's interest first and the national interest first and inviting the bipartisan cooperation that this committee presents. I speak from my own interest as shadow minister for education and training. Yesterday, the Premier in question time was reflecting on the government's submission to the surface vessels review and talking about the things that the South Australian government was putting in place in order to ensure that the future workforce that Australia would need was available, as we would need the ongoing provision of shipbuilding to maintain that workforce delivery. Those matters would only be improved by having a bipartisan parliamentary committee to support the government in their endeavours. The way the Premier described that submission we would like to give it our absolute full support, because we seek the same outcomes of continuous shipbuilding in South Australia. From the way the Premier described it, I am confident that a bipartisan parliamentary committee might have added value, might have tested some of the rationale being put forward to ensure that when the state is putting its best foot forward to the commonwealth we do so having had those suggestions tested and polished up into their best possible form. I think that a bipartisan committee would enable the parliament to progress with a shared understanding of priority areas so that when the government are considering making particular investments in a particular way they can do so confident that the opposition understands the priority and the need for that, because the opposition will have participated in the committee that is considering those matters. I think it has the opportunity to reduce the risk of South Australia appearing in any way non-bipartisan in any of the matters related to AUKUS. The requirement that we would have to test the government in question time on certain matters might be reduced because we would already understand the government's thinking or actions in a certain place. It will have had the opportunity to be tested by a committee where the politics will not even be seen to be present because of the nature and the way that we have suggested it be set up. The Leader of the Opposition has gone about this in the right way. We have approached the government—and, as I understand, there has been a direct approach to the Premier as well—identifying our eagerness to pursue this course of action. We would envisage that a committee such as this will exist not just for the term of this parliament but potentially for the term of the AUKUS agreement, which is, as we expect, decades and generations into the future. We think we should start with a select committee so that we can establish a framework for how this matter will operate. This is an alliance—an agreement to share technologies and a commitment for Australia to undertake work in the shared national defence with the UK and the United States in the years to come—that presents for South Australia a unique opportunity to make a contribution. Young people who are currently in primary school might well have significant leading roles in a whole range of industries, not just shipbuilding, because the AUKUS agreement is more than building submarines. Those submarines are going to be amongst the most significant technological challenges that this country has ever delivered upon, and those opportunities must be met by a workforce that is capable and that has a broad range of skills. Indeed, the opportunity for high-paying jobs, for work with peoples' hands and for work with peoples' minds across a whole range of industries that AUKUS opens up is breathtaking. Those primary school students and secondary school students need to be given great advice, need to be incentivised and encouraged along the way, and that is also the duty of all of us as community leaders. I think that the government bringing the opposition into their thinking in the way that it is going about that business can only benefit the state to ensure that when we talk about those opportunities to young people, through whatever mechanisms we do—through the media, through our personal engagements in the community—we do so with one voice. It is only by doing that that we will realise those opportunities. This is something on which there cannot be a partisan divide. There cannot be politics played. The government should support this motion, and we should support it today and on every opportunity it is presented if it is not supported today. We will continue to call on the government to support this motion. We hope and we trust—and we will, indeed, congratulate them if and when they do agree with this motion. We urge them to do so in about 10 seconds. Mr ODENWALDER House of Assembly Elizabeth Mr ODENWALDER (Elizabeth) (11:12): Disappointingly, I move: That the debate be adjourned. The house divided on the motion: 21 12 12 Ayes	21 Noes	12 Majority	9 AYES Andrews, S.E. Bettison, Z.L. Brown, M.E. Champion, N.D. Clancy, N.P. Cook, N.F. Fulbrook, J.P. Hildyard, K.A. Hood, L.P. Hughes, E.J. Koutsantonis, A. Michaels, A. Odenwalder, L.K. (teller) Pearce, R.K. Piccolo, A. Picton, C.J. Savvas, O.M. Stinson, J.M. Szakacs, J.K. Thompson, E.L. Wortley, D.J. NOES Basham, D.K.B. Batty, J.A. Bell, T.S. Brock, G.G. Gardner, J.A.W. McBride, P.N. Patterson, S.J.R. Pratt, P.K. Speirs, D.J. (teller) Tarzia, V.A. Teague, J.B. Telfer, S.J. PAIRS Boyer, B.I. Marshall, S.S. Mullighan, S.C. Pederick, A.S. Malinauskas, P.B. Cowdrey, M.J. Close, S.E. Hurn, A.M. Hutchesson, C.L. Pisoni, D.G. Bignell, L.W.K. Whetstone, T.J. Motion thus carried; debate adjourned.