Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Tuna Industry TUNA INDUSTRY The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS Legislative Council TUNA INDUSTRY The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (15:07): As a supplementary question arising from the answer, will the minister, on behalf of the government, rule out designating mining royalties to regional infrastructure? The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business TUNA INDUSTRY The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:07): We have this phoney debate the Liberal Party has been using about royalties. What happened was that the National Party in Western Australia came up with a policy at the last election. Western Australia has about $4 billion a year in mining royalties. The National Party there promised that it would spend 25 per cent (about $1 billion a year) on regional infrastructure. Of course, it was elected and that has now come about. The problem in South Australia, of course, is that mining royalties are such that 25 per cent is about $40 million. The fact is that this government spends far more than 25 per cent on regional infrastructure across government departments. One could come up with a phoney policy where we say, 'Look, because we spend so much more, we will do a bit of paper shuffling here. We will notionally allocate money to mining royalties and that will make us look good. We can cash in on what they've done over in Victoria, so we'll notionally allocate it and just shuffle the money around.' However, that would not necessarily mean that any extra money would get to the regions. What will get more money to all South Australians, including the regions, is growing the mining industry, which this government has done. We are about the business of increasing royalties; and we have been assiduous in doing that. As I said, we would appreciate a bit of help from members opposite instead of them bagging us every time we make a decision. They have already tried to derail the Olympic Dam expansion. The Leader of the Opposition— The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Well, you have. You and the deputy leader have said that you will add $1 billion to that project, which would put it at risk. Let us make no mistake here: is it not your position that you will demand that the desalination plant be located near Ceduna, which will add two or three years, because you would not be able to put the pipeline through the Woomera protected area or across Lake Giles? It would add two or three years and perhaps also add anything up to $1 billion. The Leader of the Opposition in the other place has come out and endorsed that, so that is the sort of contribution that members opposite make to the mining industry. It is all very well for them to talk about how they will divide royalties, but what about making sure we get them in the first place? This government has spent far more than 25 per cent of our mining royalties on infrastructure in rural areas, and it will continue to push hard–as it has done—to ensure we get growth in our regional areas. It is absolute hypocrisy from members opposite who are adding billions of dollars and delays to those two projects, and in the case of Olympic Dam possibly putting it in jeopardy by their conditions. They would be much better off concentrating on making sure we get the royalties instead of worrying about where they will go.