ONE AND ALL

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (15:05): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Leader of the Government a question regarding the refurbishment of the One and All vessel.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS: Yesterday my colleague the Hon. David Ridgway questioned why the Rann government hired Victorian legal firms to form contracts for major projects, effectively sending many dollars interstate. Last week the Premier announced that his government had paid $2 million to a maintenance yard in Sydney to refurbish the One and All vessel. The maintenance yard carried out repairs, replacement or refurbishment of such things as deck, hull and internal structure, masts, rigging and bulkheads, accommodation, showers and toilets. I add that the Liberal opposition is very proud of the One and All and is supportive of the One and All Youth Development program. We are not so sure that we are supportive of seeing South Australian taxpayers' dollars contribute $2 million to a business in Sydney when the government is telling us to shop locally. My questions to the minister are:

1. Were South Australian firms given the opportunity to tender for this work?

2. Is it true that refurbishment work is being carried out in South Australia to fix leaking decks and toilets which was improperly carried out in Sydney?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:07): This government is, of course, strongly supportive of local industry and supports it wherever possible. Having said that, of course—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: The fact is that refurbishing large wooden vessels is not an activity that is particularly common around the world, and particularly so in South Australia.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: It is a matter of the level of expertise and also price. However, wherever possible, this government is very supportive of local industry. There have been questions in relation to the motor vehicle industry. Notwithstanding the legal obligations we have under the Mutual Recognition Act, whereby all states are obliged to abide—as was seen with the situation involving motor vehicle purchase, for example—with those constraints, this government does all it can to support local industry.

Clearly, when there are very specialist projects it may well be that the state does not have the required expertise. In relation to the One and All, I am not acquainted with the details of the letting of that contract. Clearly, that would be a highly specialist job, given the particular vessel in question. I would have thought that members of the opposition would be appreciative that this government has decided, in very difficult economic times, to give priority to the refurbishment of that vessel so that young South Australians can continue to have the opportunity for the training associated with it. One would have thought that members opposite would be appreciative of the fact that we are supportive of young people who benefit from this project.

However, I will refer the question to the appropriate minister and get the details relating to that contract. Providing refurbishment for a very specialist vessel, a wooden sailing ship, is not exactly the sort of mainstream activity that we have in this state. Certainly, we do provide many specialist activities and services in our state and we do our best to support them, but refurbishing wooden sailing ships is not one of those mainstream activities.