Infrastructure Investment Program

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA (Hartley) (12:29): I move:

That this house—

(a) condemns the outcome of the federal government's 90-day infrastructure review;

(b) condemns the axing of the following five key infrastructure projects in South Australia:

(i) Hahndorf township improvements and access upgrades, including the $45 million Mount Barker interchange;

(ii) Truro freight route;

(iii) Onkaparinga Valley Road/Tiers Road/Nairne Road intersection upgrade at Woodside;

(iv) Old Belair Road upgrade at Mitcham; and

(v) Main South Road upgrade between Myponga and Cape Jervis;

(c) condemns the federal government for removing $399.6 million in federal funding for the above listed infrastructure projects; and

(d) urges the state and federal Labor governments to reinstate the infrastructure projects originally planned.

By way of background, federal Minister for Infrastructure, Catherine King, announced on 1 April that she was ordering this 90-day review into around $120 billion worth of 10-year or so infrastructure pipeline projects, with a focus on road and rail projects. This would assess the costs of projects with allocated federal funding.

Labor's 90-day review was released around day 195, which was 16 November 2023, announcing various projects would not be going ahead and also proposing that further projects may have 50:50 funding with states, no longer being the 80:20 arrangement. The federal government announced that the commonwealth would no longer provide that arrangement of funding.

Consequently, we also saw that five key projects got funding cuts, and they were the Hahndorf township improvements and access upgrades, including the $45 million Mount Barker interchange, which is desperately needed in South Australia; the Truro freight route; the Old Belair Road upgrade at Mitcham; the Onkaparinga Valley Road/Tiers Road/Nairne Road intersection upgrade at Woodside; and the Main South Road upgrade between Myponga and Cape Jervis.

As I have pointed out to this house before, the people especially of Hahndorf and the Adelaide Hills have absolutely been taken for a ride by Labor. It also confirmed why the government has moved to a bandaid solution for places such as River Road, which my friend the member for Heysen and I have visited many times with residents who are so frustrated by both state and federal Labor governments. We know what we need up there is a properly funded bypass.

All these projects would have contributed to South Australia's positive economic output. We know that Adelaide is the only city, it is said, where the number of hours lost to traffic congestion has actually increased since 2019. One figure shows a 16 per cent increase versus a 27 per cent fall amongst other peers.

In 1997-98, it was said that the speed across the day in some parts of the city on average was around 43 km/h. In 2021-22, that was 35.5 km/h. We are seeing that traffic is grinding to a halt in parts of the city. We know that Adelaide has the third slowest average travel times per 10 kilometres. Only Sydney and Melbourne had worse performances in the data that I have been shown. Several articles have alluded to this. Recently, one article in InDaily stated: 'Slowdown: Adelaide's traffic grind revealed in new official data.'

The Truro freight route is an extremely important project, and we all thought that was going ahead until the federal government announced this savage cut. We know that the Truro freight route, once upgraded, would improve road safety for all road users through Truro and the Truro Hills, resulting in improved road infrastructure to support the Sturt Highway's function as a key strategic link between Sydney and Perth, enabling future PBS level 4A heavy vehicle use to increase the efficiency of long-distance freight.

It would allow for heavy vehicles to use a new alignment on the Sturt Highway to divert freight traffic from the town centre. It would transform the amenity of Truro to make it a key destination and gateway to the Lower Barossa—and what a beautiful part of the world that is. I have had the pleasure of visiting there many times with my friend the member for Barker and also the member for Schubert, and many other colleagues. What a fantastic bakery there is in Truro. I especially like popping in there.

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Always after a workout, member for Elizabeth, of course. If we upgraded this freight route we would also improve the liveability of Truro and surrounds as a place to live, work and do business. We know that several works were proposed and were committed to. There would be a 1.5-metre wide centre median, there was provision for new overtaking lanes, two westbound and one eastbound, and provision for new connections to the new Sturt Highway at nearby places as well.

After the 90-day review was handed down, it was interesting because you saw premiers and you saw ministers—in some cases Labor premiers and Labor ministers—literally condemning the federal Labor government. But you did not see that here in South Australia. You heard literally crickets from this Labor premier and these Labor ministers. Why is that the case? It is absolutely unbelievable.

For example, I looked at a recent article that was published by The Australian newspaper, where New South Wales Treasurer, Daniel Mookhey, said that 'the commonwealth's decision had blown $1.4 billion in the state's budget'. He went on to say:

It's clear that NSW and its government has been talking to the commonwealth but they haven't been listening...

We saw criticism in other Labor states. For example, we saw Queensland actually accusing the Albanese government of dishonesty after Ms King originally claimed to have the backing of the states to carry out the new plan.

It is absolutely unbelievable what we have seen from this Labor government. How could they stand by while literally millions and millions of dollars were cut from South Australia? It is just a joke. When the federal Labor government made these savage cuts we saw federal Labor ministers, state ministers, state premiers and also federal ministers condemning these cuts, but we just have not seen the same sort of backbone by those opposite.

That is really disappointing because politics aside—and there is a fair bit of politics that goes on in this chamber, let's face it, sometimes even from the Minister for Education—these were projects of merit, and these communities are now going to suffer because of the petty politics of those opposite and their mates in Canberra. It is just not good enough, and that is why we are here today condemning these actions of this federal Labor government and this state Labor government. It is not good enough. South Australians especially deserve a government that is going to stand up for their interests, and that has not happened in this case.

We, on this side of the chamber, will continue to advocate for South Australian infrastructure projects, projects that are of merit, projects that stack up economically and projects that result in busting congestion, because we know that South Australia is the third most congested city in Australia at the moment. It is not good enough. What we need are more resources devoted to these congestion-busting projects, not resources being diverted from them. It is very disappointing that, when we saw other premiers around Australia condemning this federal government, we literally heard crickets from this Premier and this infrastructure minister. I commend the motion to the house.

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (12:39): The federal government's 90-day infrastructure review revealed a stark and disturbing picture of the future of infrastructure investment under the Morrison government: projects underfunded and projects without proper business cases, a genuine mess. While we may agree that the resulting project cancellations are disappointing, particularly the interchanges on the South Eastern Freeway, there is no doubt that a review of the infrastructure pipeline by the commonwealth was warranted. The findings speak for themselves.

There are several problems with this motion, including that the member for Hartley does not appear to be aware of the views of the rural Liberal backbench on the issues raised. He calls for the governments to reinstate the infrastructure projects as previously planned. I repeat: as previously planned. He is apparently unaware that a number of members of his own party have been writing to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, indicating that in their opinion the Marshall Liberal government's plans for Truro were vastly inadequate, and that significant changes would be required.

I assume that those Liberal members will be voting against the member for Hartley's motion today, to avoid now looking like hypocrites to their constituents. Will they support the party line or will they support their constituents' wants and needs as expressed in writing to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport? Whatever their actions today, their silence on the project while the Liberals were in government is condemning enough.

The motion also fails to note that the federal shadow assistant minister for infrastructure and transport, Tony Pasin—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have been pretty lenient for those members on my left. If I hear another squeak out of you during this discussion, you will be leaving the chamber, and that includes the member for Hammond who I have heard a number of times. Member for Waite, you will speak uninterrupted.

Ms HUTCHESSON: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The motion also fails to note that the federal shadow assistant minister for infrastructure and transport, Tony Pasin MP, has refused to guarantee a new federal Liberal government will even fund the Truro bypass when asked to do so on radio—refused.

Members interjecting:

Ms HUTCHESSON: GlobeLink. The motion demands that federal Labor do what the federal Liberals will not. Pure, unadulterated hypocrisy from those opposite.

In counterpoint to Mr Pasin's failure, the Malinauskas government has clearly indicated that it stands ready to fund the Truro bypass, and interchanges at Mount Barker and Verdun, as soon as the commonwealth funding is made available. The Malinauskas government stands ready to fund its portion of the Onkaparinga Valley Road, Tiers Road, Nairne Road intersection upgrade at Woodside.

And, in regard to the Old Belair Road in Belair—a project that was put on hold whilst an independent review was carried out by Infrastructure SA—the review found that it was not justified and had a rapid benefit cost ratio of 0.9. Any BCR score below one means the costs outweigh the benefits. They said:

Ultimately, the proposed junction treatment represents a capital expenditure of over $15 million to address traffic issues primarily caused by 240 vehicles per hour in the morning peak…

Infrastructure SA found:

The proposed roundabout would have resulted in the potential loss of 148 native trees, which have unique environmental value and are of significant interest to our community. Based on the design of the current roundabout solution and the associated impacts, both in terms of costs, benefits and disbenefits, and the possibility of other non-infrastructure and infrastructure options that could minimise impacts and traffic issues at this junction, this Review finds the investment as currently proposed is not justified and further options to potentially reduce demand at the junction should be explored.

It was not justified. We will be opposing this motion, and whilst it is disappointing that the list of projects were cancelled by the federal government, the Malinauskas government stands ready to fund its portion of these projects. But, on the basis of the misinformation and lack of information contained in the motion, we oppose the motion this morning.

Mr BATTY (Bragg) (12:43): I rise to speak in support of the shadow minister's motion condemning the Labor government's infrastructure cuts in South Australia. It is very clear we are big losers here in South Australia from this infrastructure review on a number of fronts, but of particular concern to my local constituents is with respect to the scrapping of the Truro freight route.

I have described the Truro freight route in this place before as being a very important project in and of itself, and I do want to leave some time this afternoon for others in this place to speak about why this is an important project in and of itself. It is also a very important first step in a wider project, and that is a Greater Adelaide Freight Bypass that would see trucks off our local roads in the eastern suburbs like Portrush Road and Glen Osmond Road in my own electorate.

We know that over 650,000 heavy vehicles come down the South Eastern Freeway every year, and we also know that the large majority of them choose to come down Portrush Road at the bottom of the freeway. Indeed, 80 per cent of B-doubles come down Portrush Road. It is Highway 1; it is what it is set up to do. Quite frankly, it is absurd that it is Highway 1 and that a truck wanting to travel from Melbourne to Perth needs to thunder down Portrush Road through my electorate, through the electorate of Dunstan, past schools like Loreto College, Seymour College and Linden Park Primary, past nursing homes, past shops and past residential homes—all things that do not mix well with B-doubles.

It is an issue for road congestion, but it is also a really important road-safety issue. It is an accident waiting to happen. Indeed, unfortunately it is an accident that has happened. There was a huge crash at the bottom of the freeway not long after I was elected to this place. Thankfully and miraculously no-one was seriously injured or killed in that crash, but we will not always be so lucky. Indeed, we have not always been so lucky. I think that was the fifth major crash at that intersection since 2010 and, sadly, some of those have involved fatalities.

I acknowledge we have talked and talked about the need to get trucks off our local roads for many years now and we have talked and talked about plans for a Greater Adelaide Freight Bypass, but what the Truro freight route represented was the first time there was actually some money on the table. In 2021, there was joint funding by state and federal Liberal governments to see a Truro freight route—an important project of itself, but also an important project for my constituents in the eastern suburbs to get trucks off our local roads. Regrettably, that is what we see scrapped by the Labor government and, regrettably, I think that will mean we are going to see trucks thundering down Portrush Road for the foreseeable future.

We know that if there is no Truro freight route, there is no Greater Adelaide Freight Bypass and there is no plan to get trucks off Portrush Road. The Liberals and I will keep fighting to get trucks off Portrush Road, even if the Labor Party will not.

Mrs HURN (Schubert) (12:47): I, too, rise in support of the motion put forward by the shadow minister for transport and infrastructure, the member for Hartley, Vincent Tarzia, and I would like to reflect on the savage cuts that have been made by the federal Labor government.

Last year, when the federal Minister for Infrastructure, Catherine King, announced that there would be a 90-day review, we were perhaps a little bit naive in expecting that would take 90 days because, of course, it ended up taking much longer than that. After that infrastructure review, what we know is that 81 infrastructure projects were cut right across the nation.

Indeed, five key infrastructure projects here in South Australia were taken off the table to the detriment of not just people in my local community but people right across the state. In fact, what we know is that Labor has slashed $399.6 million worth of funding for South Australian road projects, stretching from Cape Jervis all the way to Truro. The impact of these cuts, as I said, will be felt not just in my local community but right across South Australia.

It will not surprise you that I will be spending the time that I have focusing a little bit on the Truro freight route. As the member for Bragg has pointed out, this was a project that was funded in 2021 by the then federal Liberal government and the then state government here in South Australia: $202 million to get trucks out of the main street of Truro. There was a plan in place to reach the goal that the locals in the area had of getting trucks out of the main street. If we look at some of the facts and figures, there are obviously thousands of vehicles that travel on the Sturt Highway each and every day and, in the main street of Truro, there are over 600 B-doubles and road trains that come absolutely steaming through that main street, essentially splitting the town of Truro in two.

Much like in the member for Bragg's electorate, it means that not only is the town of Truro split into two, but we have businesses trying to navigate these 600 B-doubles and road trains each day, we have young kids trying to get safely to school and needing to cross over this thoroughfare, and frankly we have people living in the main street also having some quite serious issues in terms of cracks in their houses, and the like.

You can imagine that the implications of having hundreds of thousands of vehicles each and every year come thundering through your main street are pretty easy to grasp. Not only do we have cyclists and motorists navigating these B-doubles and road trains, but we have school kids and local residents trying to get from A to B.

I have invited the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure here in South Australia to come and join me in Truro so that he can see firsthand the impact that these road trains and B-doubles have, so that he can see firsthand how difficult they are to navigate on a daily basis. I am yet to have him take me up on that offer, but I hope that in due course the minister will join me in my electorate, like he did with the member for Kavel, so that he can see firsthand some of the impacts here.

There are a number of other things in relation to the Truro freight route that I would like to get on the table. Not only do we now have significant road safety concerns that will be ongoing for the local community as a direct result of the Labor government taking money off the table for this freight route, but we have a main street in total disrepair. Locals would like to see the main street—Moorundie Street in Truro—resurfaced. I have also contacted the Minister for Police about some of the speeding concerns through the main street as that is something concerning my local community.

Also linked to the Truro freight route, when that was first announced by the Liberal government, was $1 million to beautify the town, the townscape and the streetscape. I have tried to seek clarification as to whether that $1 million is still available for my local community but have not yet received that clarification. I will continue following that up, because I do think it would be an absolute shame if not only the Truro freight route was cut but also if the $1 million to help beautify the town was also cut.

Beyond the road safety implications for locals, I also want to get on the record that—and my colleagues the member for Hammond and the member for Chaffey will also no doubt speak to this—truckies do not want to be in the main street of Truro either. Truckies carting the fantastic produce we have from right across South Australia do not want to be dodging little kids and elderly people in the main street of Truro.

We had a plan in place to get these trucks, these B-doubles, these road trains, out of the main street of Truro and on to the Sturt Highway, essentially out of the town. As a direct result of the Labor government cutting that funding, there is now no plan in place, which is why I support the member for Hartley's motion, where we are urging the government to reinstate that funding so that projects like the Truro freight route can finally be delivered.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (12:53): I, too, support this motion by the member for Hartley in condemning the outcome of the so-called 90-day review. Let us remember that this review took close on 200 days, with the outcome of the federal Labor government cutting $400 million from vital road funding in this state. We have heard the member for Schubert and others tell us about all the issues with the Truro freight bypass, and there are major issues.

I have travelled up and down that road many times, and you see how tight it is for the citizens of Truro to go back and forth, for people to access schools and shops—to just to go about their daily lives without heavy freight passing through the town. Here was a sensible outcome to bypass the town with that freight bypass and get those heavy loads off the road. There is already a lot of work being done with anything bigger than a B-double going around that bypass, coming up from Murray Bridge through Mannum, Sedan and the Halfway House Corner on the Sturt Highway, which is keeping a lot of freight out of the city—but more needs to be done to make it more attractive for that freight to go around there.

Just briefly, because I know there are others who want to speak, I also slam the government for not standing up, as well, for the Hahndorf bypass. Hahndorf is a car park. It is a great place to visit, and that is why people go there. It is a fantastic place to visit, but it is literally a standing car park.

What the government did by putting trucks up River Road put local communities at risk, and they had to cut down many, many trees—and for what? Just take the sensible option and put that bypass in at Hahndorf, and get that intersection in at Mount Barker, so that people can actually get in and out of there in a timely manner, for the many thousands—many thousands—of people who have to travel around that area at times.

The essential steps should have been taken. Yes, there might have been some compulsory acquisition, but that is why it is called compulsory acquisition. Sometimes the greater good has to be done. It got done on the freeway: it went straight through Alexander Downer's property, straight through, so that we can access Adelaide with some decent roads from the bush—and you notice that when you come from regional areas.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:55): I will make a brief contribution to support the member for Hartley's motion. It is an important motion, because these five key infrastructure projects now being shelved is a monumental blow, not only to the productivity of roads here in South Australia but also to road safety.

None of these projects are in my electorate, but the Truro freight route greatly impacts the people of the Riverland and the Mallee; not only for freight but also for travelling from the Riverland to Adelaide. Being able to use this freight route would give a significant safety upgrade and productivity gain for the many, many hundreds of trucks—some 700 per day—and the four and a half thousand vehicles that travel through Truro every day. They would see the benefit of a project like this.

It is very, very concerning when we have, I think, a political manoeuvring exercise; a 90-day review, as the member for Hammond said, turn into 200. I put a petition in to this chamber with over 10,000 signatures calling on the government to prioritise this freight route at Truro. It must be put back on the burner so that we can actually get the productivity going, get the trucks off Portrush Road, make our highways safer and make South Australia a better place to traverse on a regional highway; safer and with productivity gains. It is an essential part of the road network here in South Australia.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (12:57): I rise too to commend the motion. I would have thought that the government would have been wholeheartedly in support of the motion as well, on behalf of all South Australians, to ensure that $400 million of funding is there and delivered.

The abandonment of the $200 million of federal money going to the Hahndorf bypass is the single biggest component of what is being abandoned. How dare the government come along and say these projects are unmeritorious, as the 90-day review has said. All South Australians know that these projects are of merit, they are important to the state.

What South Australians need is to have an active and capable voice of advocacy in their corner, but the last people they are going to turn to is this insipid state Labor government, that comes into this place and says, 'Oh well, we'll put money back into the budget, maybe, if the federal counterparts maybe see their way clear but, ah gee, they've done some careful work and they know things, this federal government.' They are not standing up, as the member for Hartley has identified, like state Labor Premiers in other states are willing to stand up and call this out, and say, 'These are important projects for our state.' So we have seen this sort of double insult.

References have been made, including by the member for Hammond just now, who has seen it for himself, as has the member for Hartley, joining me on River Road. The poor residents of River Road have had to suffer this ignominy of making it up as you go along, this hodgepodge, 'We'll send it this way', and then next minute there is this announcement that, 'We're not doing the bypass at all.' We have had to see people literally at the front of their quiet road all of a sudden having all these trucks going by being drawn into this national debate that the state Labor government is not willing to take up to federal Labor.

It is a disgrace that the state Labor government has not been willing, so far, to speak up on behalf of all South Australians. In terms of supporting this motion, the least it could do is support the motion of the member for Hartley and then take up the cause nationally.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.