SA Water

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (14:53): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister responsible for SA Water some questions regarding the recent propaganda that the minister and his department are putting out to the community.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: Recently, I received a very expensive water bill, as I am sure all other customers of SA Water also received. The brochure actually said, 'A welcome reduction in water and sewerage prices, $87'. It went on to say that South Australian water bills are set to reduce on average by $87 in 2016-17, following a decrease of $44 in 2013-14 and limited to inflation in 2014-15 and 2015-16. It says, 'We continue to work to deliver affordable prices for our customers'.

Today in my office, I had a lovely letter from the minister, as I am sure my colleagues did, with a very glossy brochure that talked about an additional $55 million being spent on replacing mains pipes over the next four years. Based on this information, my questions to the minister are:

1. Did the brochure that came with the water rates comply with the truth-in-advertising test, or should it have been more balanced and reminded people that prior to these reductions this minister's government increased water and sewerage prices by over 300 per cent in just a few years? Does this comply with the truth test for advertising?

2. Where will the $55 million to do this accelerated replacement pipework in Adelaide and rural South Australia come from?

3. Does the minister admit that he is now in panic mode and accelerating what has been a reduction in replacing mains over a period of time? Is this a grab to try to fix some of the problems prior to the next election and, if it is, why weren't you replacing more pipe in previous years when you were increasing, astronomically, water and sewerage prices to people who were struggling to afford to pay their bills in South Australia?

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:56): I never thought I would see the day when you come into this place and one of the men responsible for the privatisation of SA Water is complaining about a price reduction on bills to ordinary South Australians. I never thought I would see the day when the gentleman who was responsible for supporting the privatisation of SA Water was complaining about a bill reduction to SA Water customers. That's what you have here: the Hon. Robert Brokenshire, the bloke responsible, with the Hon. Mr Lucas, the chief architect of privatisation, otherwise known as the merchant of misery in the other place—and I will come back to that epithet in a moment.

Here we have the Hon. Mr Robert Brokenshire complaining—complaining—about a water minister and a government, a state Labor government, driving down the cost of water bills. Goodness gracious me! What does he want? Does he want to see their bills go up? He is complaining about an $87 reduction on the average water and sewerage bill, which followed the first reduction of $44, on average—about $130 taken off the average annual bill of SA Water customers and the Hon. Robert Brokenshire is complaining. Goodness gracious me! And, he doesn't want anybody to know. He doesn't want us to tell anybody that, because of this government's regulation of SA Water through ESCOSA, we are driving down the costs and prices of average bills to South Australians. He doesn't want people to know that.

This man has been in so many political parties, I am surprised that he hasn't thought about another one. There are political parties being set up that he might go and apply to, as some senators in Queensland are doing right now, as I understand it. Here we have a man who doesn't understand the first thing about water, even though he privatised it, along with his Liberal state government at the time.

Let's not forget—because I want to remind him before he goes to it—that the Liberal Party also promised to build a desal plant. What do you think that would have done, Mr President, to the price of water in South Australia? Well, pretty much exactly the same as it did—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: About 30¢ less, Hon. Mr Ridgway, before you get to it—about 30¢ less because this government drove a fantastic deal—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Minister, take your seat.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Yes, we did.

The PRESIDENT: There is to be no debate. The minister is on his feet. He is trying to answer the question, and he should be allowed to do so without interjections. The honourable minister.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Here we have the Liberals proudly proclaiming that they are so proud that they build half of infrastructure. This is the mob that gave us half a road to the south, and they wanted to give us half a desal plant. They promised a desal plant just as much as we did. That's why there was an increase in water bills: to provide for security for South Australians in the provision of water into the future. And because this state Labor government drove such a hard deal with the federal government, the amount of difference on their bills amounts to about 30¢, because we are the great financial and economic managers in this state, unlike the Liberal Party.

Look at the debt your federal government is running into—the Hon. Mr Ridgway's federal government's debt. They are bad economic managers. The days are long gone when anyone could think or even pretend that the Liberals are natural economic managers. They are bad managers of the state. They build half infrastructure projects, half roads to the south, half desal plants. It is the state Labor government that can build the full—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Stephens—

The Hon. T.J. Stephens: What about him?

The PRESIDENT: All members bar the minister, who is on his feet, should be seated and quiet while the minister gives an answer to this important question.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Thank you for your protection, Mr President. They get a little bit agitated about this. They have absolutely no record to stand on. We have the Hon. Mr Brokenshire complaining about a water and sewerage reduction because he was the bloke, along with his Liberal government, who privatised SA Water in the first place, and you see—

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: No, we didn't.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: They wanted to privatise SA Water. They privatised ETSA and they want to privatise SA Water. We know that's their agenda. He asked the question—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Well, we know you're the natural party of privatisation, Mr Ridgway, and you've got the chief architect of privatisation sitting right behind you.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway: You don't privatise: you just give it away.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: And now we have them complaining about assets being given away. Who were the people who privatised the assets of the TAB for nothing? Next to nothing! They gave it away. It was the Hon. Mr Lucas again.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! There should only be one person speaking and that is the minister. Give him the respect he deserves while he is on his feet.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: The Hon. Mr Brokenshire also quibbles about where the extra investment will come from. Clearly, he has not read the press release or any of that wonderful material—indeed, the 'lovely letter' that he said I sent him. If he had done so or if his staff had done so and properly briefed him, if they could find him, then he would understand that SA Water have reprioritised their asset spend over the next four years.

They discussed it with ESCOSA and got approval to bring forward that extra $55 million worth of investment, which I remind you is on top of the extra investment from last year where we promised to build another 100 kilometres of water mains pipe above and beyond the 171 kilometres that was originally planned.

Because of great government control of a state-public enterprise, we can, as a state government, encourage SA Water to do the best it can for its customers, drive down costs of water and sewerage bills on average and provide more assets to give a better service. Only a state Labor government can be trusted to keep SA Water in public hands. The Liberals want to privatise it, just like they privatise anything when they get into government, and then we end up paying for it.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Supplementary.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Ms Lensink has the floor.