Santos

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (14:47): My question is to the Premier. Has the Premier discussed the proposed sale of Santos with the federal Treasurer ahead of the considerations of the Foreign Investment Review Board, and if so, what was the nature of those discussions?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:47): No, I have not had a chance yet to discuss the matter with the federal Treasurer. I know that our Treasurer is in regular discussion with Jim Chalmers. I was in Canberra yesterday though, naturally, and discussed the matter with a number of officials, but it was not discussed with the Treasury. Yesterday, I met with the Deputy Prime Minister. I also took the opportunity to meet with other members of the defence political group, namely Peter Khalil, who is an assistant minister, to discuss defence estate planning.

I also had an opportunity yesterday to have a really important meeting with the Minister for Industry along with our Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Energy and Mining regarding Whyalla. The meeting with the Deputy Prime Minister, the defence minister and Minister Ayres were the most important meetings yesterday. The discussions we had around Whyalla but also other matters to do with the Upper Spencer Gulf, including Port Pirie, were lengthy and important in nature.

Yesterday, amongst all that, we did schedule a time for me to take a call with the Abu Dhabi-based company that has announced its pursuit of Santos, and also, obviously, I have spoken to the CEO of Santos as well. The state government is going to pay very close attention to this indeed. We are not alarmed by it, because there were no surprises for us regarding these events, but we are concerned to the extent that we want to make sure that any change of ownership of Santos could only occur—as far as we are concerned, should only occur—when it is in the state's interests.

Let me put on the record something I said in caucus this morning and elsewhere. Santos directors and management have a duty to their shareholders. We respect that duty and obligation but appreciate that it is very, very different to the duty that we have within the government. Our duty is to the people of South Australia, who ultimately in our view own the resources below the ground, and we want to make sure that if there is a change of ownership in Santos that it only occur if it is in the interests of South Australia and its people. That invites a different consideration, a different set of variables that need to be examined versus what the board and shareholders will consider.

It may well be the case that those interests align but it may well be the case that those interests diverge and that will be informed by a whole lot of detail, detail that will be thoroughly examined over the months and months ahead. This is not going to be a short process, it is going to be a long one.

But let me be plain about something. While Santos is an important and big company in this state, we don't owe them anything. We care about them and we are interested in them, but what we owe the people of our state are the best economic opportunities in the future, which means first and foremost Santos is going to stay in South Australia, certainly its headquarters, but there may be other conditions as well.

If we form a view on the basis of all the best advice that we can procure that this change of ownership is the wrong way to go for our state, we are going to oppose it and we are going to fight it. If, however, this represents a significant economic opportunity for South Australia, then we will seek to facilitate it where we can. That work we take seriously and will consider in great detail over the months ahead.