LATE PAYMENT OF GOVERNMENT DEBTS (INTEREST) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 29 October 2013.)

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:00): I rise to speak on behalf of the Greens with regard to the Late Payment of Government Debts (Interest) Bill 2013. I note that this bill has now sat in the parliament for almost five months after being introduced in the House of Assembly on 19 June this year, so I thought it was a timely moment to draw the attention of the council to the existence of this bill and to urge the government to get on and put it on the priority list. It is nowhere in the top 10 yet and obviously with one sitting week to go, we have only a few short days left to pass it, although if members of this council would like to surprise me we could see this bill pass through all stages today. I would be delighted.

I note that this bill before us refers also to the report by Mr McCann being delivered in June 2013—well, that was actually June 2012—and indeed back in 2012 the Payment of Accounts Review recommended this legislation which it would have called a 'Prompt Payment Act'. I am not sure why the government has dropped the 'promptness' from its name but clearly it has happened in the practice as well that the promptness has dropped. A year behind that prompt payments legislation being recommended we finally are seeing some legislation in this house.

The review drew attention to what is a serious issue with regard to late payment by this government of its bills. They have significant consequences for business in this state and particularly for small businesses. I note that in February 2013 The Advertiser explored this issue and quoted that:

Some businesses have told The Advertiser they have never been paid late while others have spoken about being forced into administration because of delays and, in one case, a fitter and joiner was forced to take an afternoon factory job to finance his business while waiting for a Government job payment.

That is simply not good enough. I think many small businesses in particular see taking on a government job as some sort of security and, as a state government, we should be ensuring that assumption made by small businesses is not found to be wanting.

It has been found that state government departments have been late in paying $919 million worth of late business invoices in the financial year before this one, missing the government's own commitment to a 30-day turnaround. That payment performance was, in fact, an improvement on the previous financial year when $1.1 billion was paid late, but it was more than double the $410 million that was paid late in 2007-08. So this is a chronic problem, it is an ongoing problem, and I am afraid the fact that this bill is languishing on the Notice Paper at the moment means that it is a problem that this government is not getting on and truly addressing.

I acknowledge that there have been some advances. In my research on this bill and in having a look at the tools and technologies now afforded many businesses dealing with most departments (but not all), there is a greater transparency and I commend the government for those steps that it has taken there. However, I simply wanted to raise that this bill is now languishing five months on in this parliament and yet to be passed. I commend finance minister Michael O'Brien who said that the government remained committed to allowing businesses to invoice for interest on late payments. I think that would very much encourage our government bureaucracies to be much more responsible regarding small business in particular. Of course, I cannot but mention one particular department here, SA Health, which has dragged the government payment performance down. Certainly when the new health minister took on the role, that was a massive challenge before him, and it remains so.

I must also note the comments of Business SA chief Nigel McBride, who said that he believed that minister O'Brien was sincere when he made that comment I mentioned before. He was quoted as saying, 'but there has to be a sense of urgency'. I draw the council's attention to the fact that there seems to be no sense of urgency here with this bill. You cannot fail to recognise the irony of what was to have been the prompt payments bill which, a year on, finally arrives in the form of this particular bill without the word 'prompt' in the title. It is a little tardy.

With that, the Greens fully support this bill. We look forward to the committee stage passing quickly. Indeed, should interest be applied on us for tardiness in progressing legislation, I imagine we might be a little quicker and a little more diligent in this place as well.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. Carmel Zollo.