Office of Northern Water Delivery

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA (Hartley—Leader of the Opposition) (14:09): My question again is to the Premier. How many staff have left the Office of Northern Water Delivery in the last two months? With your leave sir, and that of the house, I will explain.

Leave granted.

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: It was reported in The Advertiser on 28 October that acting chief executive Matt Hardy resigned last week, telling staff 'it no longer makes much sense for me to continue being involved'.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens—Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for Energy and Mining) (14:09): When this project came to me, I immediately instructed my infrastructure agency to conduct a review. They have done an exceptional job in procurement advice for the South Australian government. They were instrumental in uncovering the blunders of the previous government on the north-south corridor, and I wanted to ensure that the project was in a good and stable position. Of course, the review has vindicated that, and the project is on a good and sound path.

But I also think it is important that the state's premier infrastructure agency be the one to conduct procurement of this project. It is what they do day to day. They are experts at it, and it is important that they do that, so we did a restructure of the office of Northern Water. That body of work, which was an attached office to the Department for Infrastructure and Transport to begin with, then is being reallocated.

Mr Hardy has now accepted another role within government. He is an exceptionally talented young man who has a very bright future in the South Australian public sector, and he has taken another role. I am extremely confident with the way that this project is being handled and has been handled.

I think it is important that this project not be confused with other infrastructure programs that the government is involved in. This project is being built and should be paid for by people who use that water. This is not about a government subsidy for a private sector proponent. This is about finding out what are the gaps to unlocking our massive copper reserves and iron ore reserves and hydrogen potential in the Upper Spencer Gulf.

I said to the house yesterday that the foresight of the Tonkin government and especially that of Roger Goldsworthy, when there was an insistence in the indenture that the then government—and to our great shame the opposition then was a Labor opposition—was that BHP, or Western Mining as it was at the time, would have to smelt copper in the state and go up the value chain. That was a very good decision.

What we want to see at Olympic Dam and what the previous government wanted to achieve at Olympic Dam is to make sure of the second-stage smelter, which would unlock the vast amount of resources after BHP have just spent $10 billion purchasing OZ Minerals, to try to create what we think is a copper province here in South Australia, to allow that ore, rather than to be exported to smelters in Indonesia, Brazil, Europe and China, that we use our technologies here to smelt that ore into copper and make copper in South Australia. The gap is water.

Mr Telfer: The question was: how many staff members have left?

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I am getting to the point. The reorganisation is about the success of the project and making sure that the appropriate people, the premier agency within government that does procurement, does it and does it well. The Office of Northern Water Delivery runs an important role. In terms of people who have left, what we have done is transfer that team into DIT. If the member for Flinders has different advice, he can stand up and he can ask me a question.

Mr Telfer: We asked the question: how many have left? We are just looking for an answer.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I have to say I do enjoy your sudden curiosity in this project that you have all claimed was your own.