House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Mount Gambier Bus Service Mount Gambier Bus Service Mr BELL House of Assembly Mount Gambier Mount Gambier Bus Service Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (14:33): My question is to the Minister for Transport. Will the minister conduct a review of the bus contract that has just been awarded for eight years to the City of Mount Gambier? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain. Leave granted. Mr BELL House of Assembly Mount Gambier Mr BELL: In a grieve on Tuesday, I highlighted that this contract is not fit for purpose. The route has not changed in over 30 years and the department did not address any of the issues highlighted by the City of Mount Gambier's council and their feedback from residents. The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS House of Assembly West Torrens Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Minister for Energy and Mining The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for Energy and Mining) (14:34): I am very concerned about the local member's feedback on this procurement, so I will be asking the department to have a look at it. Whenever you go out to market for new services, to replace a service or to continue a service, there are often opportunities for improvements. It is very difficult in regional communities for us to always get that right. It's fair to say that we have gone out for a competitive tender and we have done that in two phases. The department released phase 1 contracts open to the market in June of last year, they were completed on 25 August last year and they commenced on 1 October for a term of eight years. But I hear what the member is saying. I know that he is in touch with his local community and I know that I get very accurate feedback from him on these matters, so it does concern me. It does concern me a lot that there may be a contract in place which is not actually serving the needs of the local community. There are things that we can do without having to change the contract. We can look at the service delivery method and model, whether or not we can do alternatives to that, but what that will mean within an existing package is a reprioritisation. I am open for that discussion with the local council and the member. It is fair to say that the member is held in high regard by the government and he knows his local community exceptionally well—as do, I would say, all the crossbench. So I would be very keen to get a better understanding of exactly what the deficiencies are. I will be entirely frank: there may be things we can't fix. It's very hard to promise, in some regional communities, the level of service that they demand and want, as things modernise. But I also accept that we can do improvements, and if we can do them within a package and a framework, we will. What I do undertake to the house is to go away and meet with the member and talk to the local council about this and what we can do to improve it. I am more than happy to liaise with him personally, so rather than him dealing with the agency, he will be dealing directly with my office. I will be personally involved in that. That's the very least we can do for the people of Mount Gambier.