Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time South Australian Brand SOUTH AUSTRALIAN BRAND The Hon. J.S. LEE Legislative Council SOUTH AUSTRALIAN BRAND The Hon. J.S. LEE (15:04): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Tourism a question about rebranding South Australia. Leave granted. The Hon. J.S. LEE Legislative Council The Hon. J.S. LEE: There has been quite a lot of coverage about a proposed name change for South Australia in newspapers, online news and talkback radio in recent times. When the Premier travelled to London earlier this month, he revealed that he would like South Australia to be rebranded for an international market because he believes South Australia suffers from an image crisis. He says he was mistaken for the Premier of New South Wales at a recent function in London. Premier Jay Weatherill commented on Cruise radio on 10 May that we want to make sure there is a strong awareness and that we need a cut-through message about South Australia which is truthful but also sums up an image of South Australia which attracts people to come here. The Premier continued to say that it is a very unclear image that we are sending to the world. On 891 ABC radio on Friday 25 May, on the topic of a proposed name change for South Australia, a number of people joined in the debate and one of them was the international film director Scott Hicks. He said, 'I think it is a bad joke. I can't think of one advantage that would come to us from doing that.' My questions are: 1.	Does the minister agree with the Premier that South Australia needs a new name to lift its international brand? 2.	If so, as the Minister for Tourism, who is promoting this state to attract more tourists, what brand name does she have in mind? 3.	How much would the government spend on the rebranding exercise for the state? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for Agriculture Minister for Forests Minister for Regional Development Minister for Tourism Minister for the Status of Women 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) (15:06): I could not agree more with the Hon. Jing Lee. In fact, the Premier has never supported a name change for South Australia. The honourable member again needs to get her facts right. Again, we see the opposition coming into this place time and time again with misinformation, badly researched information. The Premier has never supported a name change for South Australia. It is outrageous. The Hon. J.S. Lee Legislative Council The Hon. J.S. Lee: My question was about branding. The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council The Hon. G.E. GAGO: Yes, and you went on to talk about changing the name of South Australia, which is misleading. It is misleading and it is dishonest. The Premier has never supported a name change to South Australia. The fact that he did talk about a branding for South Australia, particularly a branding that might better resonate overseas, is not renaming South Australia. The fact that the general media used that as a bouncing board to discuss those sorts of things is something completely outside the control of the Premier. That is about popular media and popular interest. The Premier has never supported that. The Hon. Jing Lee, as with all the other members of the opposition, needs to get her facts right. They need to come into this place, get off their tails and not be so lazy. They are too lazy to do any decent research, way too lazy to do any decent research. In fact, recently the Premier did announce the need for South Australia to consider its branding. This announcement was based on information that found 'South Australia' fails to distinguish the state from the southern half of the continent and the abbreviation SA is easily confused with South Africa. The current brand fails to adequately reflect the state's uniqueness and distinction from other Australian locations. Perceptions of Adelaide and South Australia need to be brought together within one overarching brand identity to maximise impact and project a consistent image of the whole of the state. The new brand will more effectively support promotional activity by reflecting a more relevant, contemporary South Australia, based on the unique attributes that distinguish the state from any other place in Australia or globally. It would provide overarching coherence and consistency—or this is what we aim to do—to branding the state in particular, but not exclusively, in the areas of trade and investment, education, agriculture, tourism and migration. The state's brand is important. We obviously need a consistent branding across those areas that were particularly identified: investment, education, agriculture, tourism and migration. The state government, as part of its deliberate strategy to drive economic growth through investment and trade, is considering a review being undertaken by Roger Hartley of South Australia's overseas representation. Mr Hartley's recommendations were released on 30 April 2012 and include shifting the focus from trade to investment. The review is timely, given recent changes to Austrade and the creation of Invest in South Australia as well as our work to develop China and India strategies. It is also part of a deliberate strategy to consolidate and streamline our approach to supporting our small to medium enterprises through building capability and facilitating increased exports. The government is obviously going to consult on the review over the coming weeks and months before a final decision is made on our overseas representation. As I have said, time and time again in this place we see the opposition come in here bagging what the government does, putting the state down with negative whingeing, whining, carping and moaning and, what is more, a good part of the time their facts are incorrect and they come into this place with misinformation. As I said, their objective is to rattle the confidence of business and to undermine the confidence of consumers, and it's an irresponsible thing to do.