APPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 7 July 2011.)

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (15:59): I rise to speak to the Appropriation Bill 2011. The state budget before us today is a surrender document. Robert E. Lee signed his surrender at Appomattox. The Japanese foreign minister and the chief of the army put their signatures on the instrument of surrender aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay. The Labor government of South Australia surrendered the last of its economic credibility in Parliament House on 9 June, when Treasurer Jack Snelling delivered his budget speech.

But the fault is not Mr Snelling's alone. The seeds of defeat were sown by the worst treasurer this state has ever seen—a man with limited talent and even less economic credibility; a man who has driven this state over a cliff and who has the temerity to boast about the wreckage he has caused. Of course, I am speaking about the Hon. Kevin Foley.

Now, it must be said that holding that position of treasurer—in fact, any portfolio—continuously for nine years is quite an achievement in modern Australian politics, and, Mr Foley should be congratulated for that. He should also thank his right wing Labor heavies who tolerated him for so long and who helped to keep in him that position. But who else could ring up a $22,000 personal mobile phone bill and simultaneously tell South Australians to pay it, while slashing and burning the public sector, racking up state taxes and charges and saying that taxpayers needed a horror budget to save money.

Who else would spend more than $80,000 on a junket to the United States this year, one of the more than 30 taxpayer-funded overseas trips? He stayed at the Waldorf Astoria, but, of course, nothing but the best for Mr Foley, when he is asking his electors of Port Adelaide to cough up for the tab.

From Port Adelaide to Ramsey, Cheltenham, Croydon, Enfield and Taylor, in each of the state's 47 electorates—but mostly in Labor electorates—Labor's economic vandalism is leaving a legacy of social dislocation, missed opportunities, higher taxes, fewer services and crippling the people who can least afford to pay. It is a truism that state or federal treasurers have less control over their income than they do over their expenditure.

Income is limited by the taxation base and its level of taxation. In this respect, of course, the Labor government has squeezed blood from a stone. Under Kevin Foley South Australia has become the highest-taxed state in the country, and this budget—the one in front of us today—makes it even worse. Rises in taxes and charges, and in utilities, will cost the average household about $750 extra this year while services will actually be cut.

But the underlying problem with Mr Foley's mismanagement is in his expenditure. As my grandfather once told me, it is not how much money you earn that makes you rich it is how much you save, and, in fact, it is how much you do not spend—but Kevin Foley has been spending, not saving. Jack Snelling is continuing in that same vein, and they have both been spending like there is no tomorrow, and for him, of course, that is, Kevin Foley, there is no tomorrow. The ex-treasurer has been hunting for a job in the private sector, but so far without success.

Less than 12 months ago he was there at the Press Club boasting that he had found a new lease of political life and that he intended to stay in parliament until the 2018 election. 'I am trying to be the best Treasurer I can,' he said. Well, he tried. He is, as we know, very trying, but the best he could do was to fail. In 2009 the Auditor-General found:

...over the past six years the state has received large amounts of unbudgeted revenues that enabled net operating surpluses.

The year before the Auditor-General said:

The state may have developed a culture of expecting growing revenues to continue to support increasing expenses.

And in the year before that, in 2007-08, here is what the Auditor-General said:

The state has received very large amounts of unbudgeted revenues.

Couple that with the warning from the 2005-06 Auditor-General's Report, which said:

Given the forecast expectation that such a revenue growth may not be sustained, control of expenses will be important. The state has benefited from sustained strength in both the local and national economy which resulted in unbudgeted revenue gains covering expenditure increases...The government has benefited from substantial windfall property taxation revenue and from higher than budgeted commonwealth current grants, particularly from the GST revenues.

Really, what does that mean, and what does that mean in language that even the Hon. Kevin Foley can understand? It means that, in the many consecutive years, the state had higher than expected revenues. These revenues had to cover growing expenses, and expenses were growing out of control.

It was not just Mr Foley's phone bill or his lavish rooms in Washington and New York while he enjoyed the nightclubs and the nightlife, over $1.5 million of hard-earned South Australian taxpayers' money has been spent by Kevin Foley on overseas trips. That did not help, but the real problem was the runaway bills. In nine out of 10 budgets actual spending exceeded the budgeted spending. In other words, in nine out of 10 years, he was unable to control his spending. In fact, I blame all the ministers of the Rann Labor government during that whole period. They all need to be held to account for being in control of our economy, our state spending and our state taxes. In nine out of the 10 budgets, they managed to blow the bank every year.

Some examples are: the $1.7 billion hospital, which now becomes a $3.32 billion hospital; the Adelaide Oval, at $450 million—not a penny more—then got up to $535 million, and rising; and the state debt also keeps rising. Kevin Foley spent nine years sending this state deeper and deeper into debt. So, what is the government's response? They sell the very things that make us money, things like the income producing forests in the South-East, for example. More than a century of forward rotations are to be sold. This is the worst possible time to be engaged in this sort of foolishness.

The forestry industry employs 3,500 people directly and double that number indirectly, and it accounts for almost 50 per cent of employment in the Lower South-East. It earns money for the South-East, for the South Australian taxpayers, and it also pays a dividend to the state government. We will not make any money from the long-term sale; it will cost us millions—tens of millions.

The hardware industry warned that new homes will cost 30 per cent more to build if the rotations were sold overseas. Mount Gambier mayor, Mr Steve Perryman, District Council of Grant mayor, Richard Sage, and Wattle Range Council mayor, Mr Peter Gandolfi, say the sale puts the jobs of 600 timber industries and 3,000 contractors—and many more—at risk. Meanwhile, the sale of the forest harvesting rights could strip the state of one of its best bushfire protections.

The timber industry said that South Australia would be left exposed to increased fire dangers. The industry warns that firefighting resource cutbacks, the abolishment of volunteer cleanups from community forests and a plan to convert the Adelaide forests into residential precincts will lead to dramatically increased bushfire risks.

ForestrySA currently funds its own fire protection services, training and monitoring, which could all be lost through the forward sale of three rotations. If it disappears through lack of funding, the community could well be at risk. ForestrySA has teams of trained firefighters manning a fleet of 12 of the state's most capable firefighting trucks. With fire dangers, the trucks and crews are stationed in the field as a first response strike force against bushfires.

Mayor Perryman is concerned—and so is the community—that lives and property will not be properly protected on catastrophic fire days, which brings me to the former the member for Mount Gambier, Rory McEwen. I read in The Border Watch—a very good paper, I might add—that Mr McEwen is now saying that forests should not be forward sold. Well, he is a little late. The decision to sell the forests was forecast in 2008, when Mr McEwen was a cabinet minister; in fact, he was the minister for forests.

I have gone to the Parliamentary Library just down the corridor and asked them to find everything that Mr McEwen had said in support of ForestrySA and the jobs from the Mid-Year Budget Review until the 2010 election. They searched the library's newspapers, radio, TV clips and databases, did a Google search of news and a search of The Border Watch. They found one article—only one. Do you know what it said? It reported that, in February last year, the Treasurer Kevin Foley said investigations were continuing after the government decided in 2008—when Rory was the minister—to consider selling two to three timber cycles up-front instead of continuing short-term contracts.

In January, of course, Rory said he was wrong to have agreed to the investigation when he was minister for forests. Yes, he was wrong then and he is wrong now. By his complicity and his silence, and by not fighting this crazy plan from the outset, he has betrayed his electorate and the people of South Australia. He has surrendered the forests of the people, and the people of Mount Gambier, to Kevin Foley's budget axe. Then, of course, he left parliament while Kevin Foley ringbarked the South-East.

Earlier this year, just as he was being dumped as treasurer and deputy premier, the Advertiser editorialised about Kevin Foley as follows:

Mr Foley has won admirers and detractors in his long stint, but he has been a good Treasurer. He will be remembered as a man who restored public faith in Labor's ability to manage the economy after the State Bank debacle.

Well, The Advertiser is wrong. Kevin Foley has been a bad treasurer, an appalling treasurer, who has sent this state backwards. He will be remembered as a man who lost the public's faith over Labor's inability to manage the economy. He will be remembered as a man who sold South Australia short and the man who gave up. A man defeated by the rigours of the job, a man who ruined and squandered every opportunity. This is a shameful budget, a legacy of a man who surrendered to his own inadequacies.

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO (16:11): I am certain that all will ignore the tosh placed on the record by the Hon. David Ridgway in relation to the former treasurer, the Hon. Kevin Foley, in the other place. I suspect that those opposite begrudgingly respect the Hon. Kevin Foley's commitment to see the state's AAA credit rating retained. Indeed, it is interesting that those opposite even disagree with The Advertiser. I suspect that does not happen too often.

Members interjecting:

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins): Order!

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: I am sure those words do not come out of your mouth.

The ACTING PRESIDENT: I suggest the Hon. Ms Zollo stick to her text.

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: I do not think I appreciate that, Mr Acting President. I am allowed to make comments in relation to what I am speaking about.

The ACTING PRESIDENT: The Hon. Ms Zollo should not respond to interjections; that was the point I was making.

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: I was actually responding to what the Hon. David Ridgway had to say in his speech.

The ACTING PRESIDENT: Well, you should proceed.

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: Thank you, Mr Acting President. I rise in support of the Appropriation Bill before us. As the Treasurer has alluded to in the other place, we are still operating in challenging economic times, with some sectors severely impacted, especially by the high Australian dollar and reduction in consumer spending. This has meant that the state revenue has been reduced by approximately $650 million on previous forward estimates and as a result the government has had to make hard decisions to ensure that the budget returns to surplus in 2012-13.

While this budget shows the government's commitment to strong fiscal discipline, it also emphasises the Labor government's commitment to invest in South Australia's future. The savings measures have been well publicised, namely, that the public sector will be reduced by 400 full-time equivalent public sector employees over the next two years. This will result in a saving of approximately $31 million per year.

It is the government's intention that the $8,000 First Home Bonus Grant will be scaled back to $4,000, ending in 2013-14. This will enable—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: Yes, I appreciate that. I actually made these notes the other week. This is going to enable cost savings of about $20 million over four years; however, the First Home Bonus Grant will still apply. As Treasurer Snelling has pointed out, the government believed it did not really have the desired effect.

The savings will also extend to major infrastructure projects. This will be achieved by delaying projects such as: the plenary building, Adelaide Convention Centre, a saving of $107.8 million over the next four years; the Outer Harbour rail electrification delayed until 2015-16, $192 million over four years; the Queen Elizabeth Hospital stage 3A will now start in 2013-14, a reduction of $30 million; and the Noarlunga health service redevelopment will now begin in 2013-14, resulting in savings of $24 million over the next four years.

In relation to infrastructure, before the Rann government came to office in 2002 South Australia was a state that was quickly being left behind. The investment this government has made to improve the infrastructure of the state will allow it to prosper well into the 21st century and will allow future generations of South Australians to reap the rewards of this investment.

The government's commitment to this vision has continued in this budget. The Treasurer has detailed some $9 billion worth of infrastructure spending over the next four years. This includes spending on: electrification of the Gawler rail line, $125 million; the South Road Superway, $843 million; the Seaford rail extension, $291 million; the Police Academy redevelopment, $53 million; and the Adelaide water interconnection system (which will allow all of Adelaide to access water from the desalination plant), $403 million. These upgrades also include rectifying the mistakes of the previous Liberal government by duplicating the Southern Expressway to allow traffic to flow both ways—certainly a novel idea—enabling economic benefits to flow to southern Adelaide.

This is all on top of the building of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital which will revolutionise health care in this state. In relation to health spending, one of the defining achievements of this budget will be the improvements to be made to the already high standard of health care that is currently enjoyed by South Australians—in particular, of course, the building of the Royal Adelaide Hospital which, with its proposed state-of-the-art facilities, will provide some of the most advanced medical care that Australia has to offer.

I would like to run through some of the benefits that the new RAH will deliver, as outlined by Treasurer Snelling: an increase in total bed numbers from 680 to 800, including beds that will be used for intensive care and high-dependency patients; 40 operating and procedural rooms with 65 square metres of space, compared to 35 square metres on the current site (which did not have the same capacity); 181 recovery spaces, compared to the current 74; an automated supply system throughout the hospital; and enough space for five MRIs, seven CT scanners and six linear accelerators.

I think one does get the picture: it is an extremely positive healthcare investment that the government is undertaking. It is something that I believe those opposite sometimes do not feel South Australians should enjoy, with their belief that the government should keep the asbestos-ridden, rundown site which the RAH currently occupies.

While the RAH is certainly an important advancement, the government has shown a commitment to those living in country South Australia, to improve access to advanced medical care. As outlined in the 2011-12 budget, the Labor government will be making significant upgrades to country hospitals located in Ceduna, Berri, Port Lincoln, Whyalla and Mount Gambier. In addition, extra funding will be provided to allow the Whyalla Regional Cancer Centre to upgrade its facilities, as well as the development of a five-chair dental clinic in Wallaroo. These funding commitments will allow country patients to access a high level of medical care in their own area, reducing the need for visits to major metropolitan facilities (which often places a great strain on families).

The government is also making a significant investment in women's health with the upgrading of breast cancer detection services. There is no doubt that breast cancer is an ever-present concern for women, especially those in the 50 to 70-year-old age group. The state government, in partnership with the federal government, will upgrade existing BreastScreen SA mobile units which will mean that breast screening units, as announced previously by minister Hill, will make the transition from analogue to digital technology, improving the chances of early detection and therefore improving survival rates amongst those who have breast cancer. As a woman I feel it is an extremely important initiative as it has the potential to reduce the impact of this terrible illness on sufferers and their families.

In relation to mental health, the Labor government believes it is an issue not to be taken lightly, especially in a modern society where the stresses placed on individuals can leave them particularly vulnerable to mental illness. Figures released by the ABS indicate that approximately 45 per cent of Australians will have some kind of mental illness in their lifetime.

This is why the government has contributed $54 million in this year's budget to help build the new 129-bed hospital at Glenside, which will include a 15-bed intermediate care facility and a new supported accommodation facility. The design of the new development, as minister Hill has previously announced, has already received awards at the Design and Health Academy Awards.

Along with the increased investment in mental health, the state government has also made the commitment to help ease the burden on those people with a disability, as well as their carers, providing extra resources to families and their carers which will total $37 million, as well as the $10.8 million which will be spent on providing disability equipment to ease current waiting times.

The government is also providing $56.1 million for disability support services, aimed at providing assistance to new patients, as well as those already in the system who require increased assistance. In a further effort to improve quality of life for those in long-term care, the government will be providing $7.7 million to help 32 residents of the Strathmont Centre move into supported community-based accommodation.

In relation to families, there is no doubt that raising a family can be at times very stressful, especially with all the pressures of modern life. Even the strongest of families can be tested from time to time. Often, this stress can lead to family breakdowns. The government, as the Treasurer has made mention in the other place, has recognised the need to help those families through this difficult time and provide a chance for them to get back on their feet.

The government will provide $19 million over the next four years to fund vital services to increase the rates of family reunification. These services will include better support for parents seeking to have their children returned to them, as well as providing additional support to the families after they have been reunited.

An extra $8.4 million will be provided to build six new residential homes to allow children in state care to be able to stay with their siblings instead of being separated. This will help improve the chances of a successful reunification of the children with their parents. In addition to this, and to help provide the proper care that these children require, the government will also provide an additional $41.7 million over the next four years.

In relation to education, the government has again shown it is committed to improving the quality of education for children in this state. New measures will include the relocation of preschools to primary school sites; facility upgrades for all schools, including Eastern Fleurieu R-12, Cleve Area School, Keith Area School, and the Eden Hills Area School; and the building of $125 million Sustainable Industries Education facility at Tonsley park, which will allow for improved training facilities for those undertaking trades training. There will also be $16.6 million over five years to help schools in South Australia manage increased electricity costs.

The safety of transport users in this state remains one of the Labor government's key concerns, and the measures included in the state budget certainly back this up. In addition to the major infrastructure projects I have already mentioned, the Labor government has set aside funding for improvements to rail safety. This will include the installation of a computerised train protection system to reduce the risk of train derailments and collisions.

It also includes upgrading works on regional freight routes to allow for the projected increase in freight transport well into the future, the placement of road safety cameras at various school pedestrian crossings across the state, as well as the purchase of seven new buses, and the increasing of services by 2014-15.

Along with these important road safety projects, the government has also made a commitment to improve public transport services for those living out in the north-eastern suburbs, especially those who make the daily commute to the city for work. As the Treasurer announced in this year's budget, $17.1 million will be invested in improving O-Bahn interchanges along the O-Bahn route at Tea Tree Plaza and Klemzig. The park-and-ride facilities will be significantly expanded at both locations, with car parking at Tea Tree Plaza to increase from 400 to 720, and Klemzig's parking facilities will increase from 215 to 435.

These measures show the government's continued commitment to building a first-class public transport network in South Australia, something this state, to its detriment, has long been without and something which will be critical going forward, as Australia embraces a clean, green future. As a former minister for emergency services, I feel it is important that I draw the chamber's attention to the investment the Labor government is making in regard to bushfire preparedness. There is no doubt that the Victorian bushfires of 2009 further highlighted the tragic results that can occur when a proper system of bushfire prevention is not in place or goes wrong.

Following on from previous budget commitments, the government will provide $23 million over the next four years to allow an extensive back-burning program to be carried out in areas prone to bushfires, including the Mount Lofty Ranges. In addition to this, a total of 56 ongoing and seasonal firefighting positions will be funded, as well as the purchase of new firefighting appliances and bulk water carriers. These measures will give our firefighters much greater ability to contain fires before they become a major threat to the life and property of residents living in high-risk bushfire areas.

As the Treasurer mentioned in his budget speech back on 9 June, there is no doubt that, when Labor came to office in 2002, South Australia was on track to becoming the backwater state of Australia, and this was due to the previous Liberal government's lack of vision. This budget, like the previous nine budgets handed down, shows the Labor government's commitment to turning around the fortunes of the state and providing a prosperous future for future generations of South Australians.

You do not have to look too far to find evidence of the success of this government's policies. We saw recent ABS figures showing an employment growth rate of 19.4 per cent since 2002 and the highest export figures ever recorded in South Australia, climbing to $11 billion in the last year. This certainly does show that South Australia is now a great place for companies to invest and to grow their business, as the government, in this budget, continues to invest in the future of South Australia, including building the RAH, the Southern Expressway duplication and the Adelaide desal plant, as well as significant investments in rural and regional services. I have no doubt that this positive trend will continue well into the future. Again, I add my support to the Appropriation Bill before us.

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (16:28): I would like to begin by saying that it is interesting having a job which is both blessed with and burdened by convention and tradition. This becomes particularly evident when one is trying to explain how things work to people in the world outside of this job. I understand, of course, that it is presently the done thing to pass the Appropriation Bill. I know that we need to do so in order for the state to keep on keeping on, so that all of our public servants can be paid and services can be delivered.

But it is strange to me and, I think, to most people who are not already entirely absorbed by the routines and the slightly odd, if I may say so, practices of this building and others governed by the Westminster system.

The strange thing is that there is no real mechanism by which to disagree with the budget. The budget is the piece of governance each year which, I believe, has the greatest effect of any on South Australians.

Yet the only direct critique the government gets on it is the whingeing, whining and, of course, the carping of we non-government members when making speeches and appearances in the media on particular issues of interest. Otherwise, the government of the day is essentially free to enshrine whatever it likes in this legislation, which we duly pass, only, later in the year, to be forced to repeatedly speak up against some of the stupider budget measures in the hope that they might be repealed. I am not saying that I plan to break with tradition and vote against the Appropriation Bill—

An honourable member: Go on!

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: We have already had tradition broken today with the Hon. Ann Bressington; I don't think we need any more.

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink interjecting:

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Because that would be terribly bad manners, Michelle Lensink, and a totally useless gesture. We need the budget to be enacted so that we can get on with life in SA, of course, but I wanted to point out that the lack of accountability that the government faces when preparing the budget is truly alarming to me. In that context I would like to take advantage of the fact that I am one of the privileged few who have the amazing opportunity to offer criticism of the budget and briefly offer my critique.

I will be brief, because I have already stated publicly through various avenues my thoughts on this budget. I have made no secret that I think it is a pretty insufficient budget not just because of a few measures here and there but because of the whole attitude of our government towards budgeting. I believe that the priorities of this government are truly upside-down, and so does much of my constituency.

The really clear thing about this budget is the government's spin on it. From hour one of the budget's release, Treasurer Jack Snelling hit out hard on the line that, while there was not much spending going on, all the spending that was occurring was directed towards the 'most vulnerable' in our society. In the days and weeks which followed budget day we saw Mr Snelling posed with his own family surrounded by babies, elderly people, people with disabilities and other cute so-called vulnerable types.

The budget papers themselves were full of smiling nurses holding brand-new babies and other social justice symbolism. This imagery happily accompanied Mr Snelling's spin that the disability sector was 'the big winner' of this year's budget. You have probably heard this one before, because I have certainly said it before, but it bears repeating: we certainly do not feel like the big winners right now, Mr Snelling. Fortunately, we are not really feeling like idiots either, so all that happy, cuddly spin about what was supposedly a happy, cuddly budget for our 'most vulnerable' did not fool us.

In fact, when you look at the budget properly it seems like the government was playing a game of opposites. The government had decided to tell South Australians that it was doing the opposite of what it actually did. The government said that it was spending big on disability with an extra $56 million poured into this area of the budget. The reality is that that money is a forward spend and that this financial year we are only being awarded an extra $6 million for disability services and equipment. While everyone in this sector appreciates the extra money, we do not appreciate being told that it is going to solve all our problems, because it simply will not.

An extra $6 million this year will make a small dent in the waiting lists currently clogging the disability services sector, but it will hardly touch the people who are bound to present for the first time in the coming 11 months. So, while Mr Snelling can tell us that he is spending big on disability, we know that what is really happening is a proliferation of the unacceptable waiting list system which ruins the lives of many South Australians with disabilities and those who care for them—and all this while hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on a sports stadium—again, a point which bears repeating, I think.

This is just one example of the back-to-front way that this government has decided to budget for the coming year. There are plenty of others. There is money for a film hub built literally on top of a mental health hospital instead of money for mental health. There is money to keep the spin doctors at work in the Department of Premier and Cabinet instead of money to pay the 44 workers in the Anti-Poverty Unit who have lost their jobs—and on and on and on.

This may be a conservative budget, it may in some sense be a responsible budget, but it is as sure as hell not a budget to help the truly vulnerable people in South Australia, and no amount of government spin is going to change that plain fact. I have spoken with Mr Snelling (both before and after the budget) and during those conversations I was heartened I must say, if only very slightly, to see that he does seem to be somewhat more receptive to the need for a holistic and radical change in the disability sector than some of his parliamentary ancestors have been. However, what Mr Snelling says is one thing and what he does may well be another.

As I said before, this job is steeped in tradition and, unfortunately, cynicism forms a large part of that tradition. Part of me suspects that this budget's supposed focus on the needy in our society was created for Mr Snelling to give a good first impression with his first budget as our state Treasurer. A part of me suspects that this will be nothing but a means to a professional end for Mr Snelling and that this theoretical interest in caring for those in our society who need help most will turn out to be nothing more than the same kind of rhetoric that people with disabilities have been force fed for years. I hope that these suspicions are in fact not true, and I pray that, come time for me to deliver my speech to next year's Appropriation Bill, I may delight in having my cynicism quashed and being proven wrong.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.