Question Time

TOURISM COMMISSION

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:23): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Tourism a question about the visitor information centre.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: A few weeks ago, the opposition received a copy of a letter from Holidays of Australia, the successful tenderers for the visitor information centre, to the then chief executive of the Tourism Commission, Mr Ian Darbyshire. While I will not quote the whole letter, the first point raised in the letter talks about the fact that Holidays of Australia has made losses of some $150,000 in the first six months of the licence agreements, that they will certainly continue to make losses going forward and that there were fundamental concerns to be addressed. The first concern mentioned in the letter to Mr Darbyshire was that:

The historical sales information provided by the commission during the tender process was completely inaccurate and misleading.

The letter goes on to state that, on page 5 of part B of the tender documents, the commission stated that the booking volumes for the retail outlets over the past 12 months of the travel centre were 98,015 enquiries, and that equated to 9,062 bookings. The letter goes on to state:

We now know, and staff at the Commission have confirmed, that these figures were grossly overstated (we estimate by 45,000 enquiries per annum). My understanding is that the enquiries figure is not limited to travel enquiries, as it includes enquiries for BASS and Ticketek tickets (eg for AAMI Stadium tickets). And in relation to booking figures, my understanding is that the Commission has (for example) counted a booking by a family of 4 (2 parents and 2 children) as 4 bookings, whereas the industry norm is to treat that as 1 booking.

I am also advised that the cattle drive in 2010 generated some $423,000 of revenue for the centre, but there was no actual planning to have that event in the future, yet those figures were included in the figures provided to Holidays of Australia. My questions to the minister are:

1. Who was responsible for ensuring that the data in the tender documents was accurate?

2. Is the bailout of Holidays of Australia an admission by cabinet that the tender process was based on inaccurate information?

3. How much money has been paid to Holidays of Australia and is also to be paid in the future?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (14:26): I thank the honourable member for his questions. This just shows how lazy and indifferent this opposition is. It is just so out of date. This stuff was on talkback radio and in the papers a month or more ago, and it is old news. The opposition is so lazy and so indifferent. Members cannot come into this place after a week's break from sitting with a new, innovative, testing question. What do they do? They come in here to rehash old news. They dust off old newspapers, they listen to and read old transcripts from radio stations. It is a disgrace. They are absolutely disgraceful. All of this is already on the public record. It has all been said and done and it is all over; it is basically all over.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. G.E. GAGO: They are so lazy and indifferent. An agreement has been reached with Holidays of Australia. On 21 February I announced that the Tourism Commission and Holidays of Australia had reached an agreement to vary the licence agreement for the operation of the travel centre. Holidays of Australia approached the Tourism Commission back in December seeking to vary that agreement, and since that time the SATC has dealt with a number of issues, which have been resolved.

These issues have now been resolved through those negotiations and through landing on an agreement, in terms of a variation to the lease. These issues have been resolved. The agreement that has been reached means that the operations will continue for customers, staff and tourism operators, so the good news is that the visitor centre will continue to operate. I have put this on the record before—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. G.E. GAGO: I have put on the record before that the arrangements have been put in place for a period of up to six months, where the government has taken over the management of five staff who will continue to provide visitor centre types of services until the end of June, and they will do that from the Holidays of Australia venue and they will operate there rent-free. The agreement also included a mutual waiver—and this is also on the public record—that releases both parties from legal claims arising from the original agreement.

Both parties, when we sat down and agreed to that variation of a lease, agreed to sign off on all matters that led to the reviewing of that lease. Both parties agreed that we would then move on from that lease and resolve those matters in a satisfactory way to both parties and that we would move on, and that is exactly what we have done. I have also put on the record in a public way that, clearly—that correspondence has been around for over a month or more, well over that; so, as I said, it is old news.

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. G.E. GAGO: It is old news; that's how pathetic and lazy they are. He has basically had to dust off an old piece of correspondence, and already—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Ridgway should listen and learn.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO: I have already been clear about that, Mr President; that we do not agree with Mr Mead's interpretation of some of those matters, and we resolved any outstanding matters through the mutually agreed variation to the lease.

I was informed by the chief executive of the South Australian Tourism Commission at the time and, again, it is on the public record that he believed that the information that was given was given in good faith and was correct—and, again, old news. TV and radio have done that to death weeks and weeks ago, so all of that is on the public record.

In terms of what has been paid to Holidays of Australia, again, this is all on the public record. Under the previous lease agreement, again, those figures are commercially confidential, because if we do want to go out to a future tender process, talking about any particular monetary amounts could very much jeopardise the government's position to be able to negotiate the best possible price in the interest of South Australians. So, clearly, I am not prepared to talk about specific amounts, but we fulfilled our financial agreements under that former lease. We then varied the lease, which means that no further payments would be made.

So, our financial obligations in relation to our first lease were fulfilled. In relation to our financial obligations under the varied lease, as I said, we have taken over the management of those five staff who the South Australian government now pays for, so we do not pay that to Holidays of Australia; we have changed the employment contract of those people. There are no moneys under this varied lease arrangement that I am aware of that the government pays to Holidays of Australia, nor is there anything in the varied lease that I am aware of that requires or obligates us to pay any further moneys to Holidays of Australia.

Those arrangements have been fulfilled and are completed under the old lease arrangement. The new lease arrangements simply pick up the release of Mr Mead from the obligations that he had under the original lease, and takes up the management of the five staff and provides for them to be able to operate from those current premises rent-free.

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Ridgway has a supplementary.