Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Privatisation Privatisation The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council Privatisation The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (14:51): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister No. 5 of the spin doctors' team, the Minister for the Environment, a question regarding privatisation. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Would you like to address the minister by his proper title? The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: The Hon. Mr Hunter, minister No. 5, the minister responsible for the environment, natural resources and other matters. Leave granted. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: Recently, we have heard the Minister for the Environment banging on about privatisation and how this government is going to protect essential services. Privatisation of essential services started under the Labor Bannon government, and that was the plan to sell off Sagasco. There were two parts to it, announced in 1992-93, to bring in a total of over $300 million to assist in the repayment of the State Bank debacle. According to the Green Left Weekly of 19 August 1992: Unions have reacted angrily to Premier John Bannon's plans to sell the South Australian Gas Company. The United Trades and Labor Council unanimously condemned the move, and the Federated Gas Employees Industrial Union is planning a midday rally on August 20, at Victoria Square. SAGASCO is one of South Australia's most profitable companies, and in 1988 the Bannon government— that is, the Labor Bannon government— gave an assurance that at least 80% of its shares would remain under government control. Privatisation of the company will mean a dramatic increase in the cost of gas for South Australians. Most of the $300 million price of the company would go towards paying off the State Bank debt. Gas workers' union spokesperson Russell Wortley says the sale— this is what Russell Wortley, the spokesperson said, Mr President— 'will be of no benefit whatsoever to the South Australian public. This is only the beginning: if the government can sell SAGASCO, what's to stop them selling off other companies?' That was said by Russell Wortley. Since then, we have (just recently) seen the sale of ForestrySA, the MAC and the LTO, to name just some of the Labor government's privatisations. So, why is the government now saying that it will not privatise essential services when it has been privatising them for donkeys' years? My question to the minister is: do you agree, minister, that you are misrepresenting the facts on Labor privatisations? The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:54): Thank you, Mr President, and come in spinner. Hon. Mr Brokenshire, chief spin doctor of the state, number one! This is a fella who is copying the playbook of the Hon. Mr Lucas. He tried to distract the community from his own complicity in not just privatisation but breaking his word to the community. That is the key difference. The Hon. Mr Brokenshire was part of a government that went to the people of South Australia and said, hand on heart, 'Trust us. We will never privatise this key utility.' Four months later that was precisely what the Hon. Mr Brokenshire did, along with the Hon. Mr Lucas. These are the spin doctors of mendacity—the Hon. Mr Brokenshire and the Hon. Mr Lucas, ministers in charge of privatisation of essential utilities—after promising South Australians they would do no such thing. On the basis of that, how can you trust a word the Hon. Mr Brokenshire or the Hon. Mr Lucas ever says? How can you trust a single word? This mock outrage, this confected outrage that the honourable member brings to the chamber, the Hon. Mr Lucas as well, is just a mask to cover up the much more heinous sin that they made a solemn promise to the community and then they welched on it. They made a promise—you made a promise—and then four months later, you turned on the community and said, 'You know what? We are tearing that promise up.' What message does that send to the community when a government goes out and promises, hand on heart, 'We will never privatise these essential services that are so important to our community. We will never privatise these essential services that every community depends on and every industry in this state depends on. Nothing works without them'? Then they said, 'Yes, we were only joking. That promise didn't really count.' It reminds you of some federal government promises made by the Liberal Party at a national level that in fact there are promises and there are things that aren't quite promises. This is a man behind me, along with the Hon. Mr Lucas, who is directly responsible for making a promise and then breaking it and selling ETSA and voting in this chamber (I am talking about the Hon. Mr Lucas at that time; the Hon. Mr Brokenshire was in the other place) to privatise an essential utility that they promised they would never do. We can spend a bit of time having a look at the record of the government which the Hon. Mr Brokenshire was a part of: The government is not considering, nor ever will it be considering, privatising either in full or part the Electricity Trust of South Australia. That was the claim by the industry minister Mr John Olsen on 25 April 1996. The Hon. Mr Brokenshire presumably agreed with that proposition at the time: The government is not considering, nor ever will it be considering, privatising either in full or part the Electricity Trust of South Australia. A promise. But as we got closer to the 1997 state election, more promises were made to South Australians by the Liberal Party and the Hon. Mr Rob Lucas and the Hon. Mr Brokenshire like this one: We are not pursuing a privatisation course with ETSA. That was premier John Olsen on 16 September 1997. He also said on 22 September 1997: I have consistently said there will be no privatisation and that position remains. Deputy premier Graham Ingerson said on 4 September 1997: There is no sale of ETSA, there is no plan for the sale of Optima Energy, full stop, full stop, full stop. He was someone the Hon. Rob Brokenshire shared a cabinet with at some stage. As we know, what did they do after the 1997 election? What happened after the 1997 election, after we had the 'full stop, full stop, full stop' promise by the premier and the deputy premier and the Hon. Robert Brokenshire and the Hon. Mr Lucas? What happened after that? A mere four months after the election, the Rob Lucas/Rob Brokenshire Liberals said, 'We changed our mind. We are selling ETSA now.' Members interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Four months it took the Hon. Rob Lucas and the Hon. Rob Brokenshire to connive together to decide that that promise wasn't really a core promise after all. Four months to break their pledge to South Australians, four months for the Hon. Rob Brokenshire and the Hon. Rob Lucas to break the heart of South Australians who re-elected that government that promised solemnly to them that they would never privatise ETSA. So, don't come to this place, Hon. Robert Brokenshire, and talk about issues and trying to avoid the topic that you should be trying to confront, which is how can anyone trust a word you say into the future? When you make a promise to the electorate, when you make a promise to South Australians, you've got a record. The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire: Read my lips. Read my lips. The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: You'll be slammed by your own record. Yes, read your lips. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! Can the minister please ignore the Hon. Mr Brokenshire and speak through the Chair. The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Yes, Mr President, we know his words mean nothing. We know his words mean nothing. They have no value anymore, no value at all to the community because he lied through his teeth. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: Point of order, sir. The minister just said that I lied. I ask that he withdraw that statement because it is untrue. Members interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! Can the minister please word his accusations— The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Indeed, Mr President. I do withdraw the accusation that the honourable member lied. That means that he knew what he was doing in the lead-up to the election in making his promises. Let's just say that he made several terminological inexactitudes in his promises to the electorate. Time and time again, he joined with those who were saying, 'Full stop, full stop, full stop, no sale of ETSA.' Time and time again he was guilty of making inexactitudes in terms of terminology, but we know that that is what he is trying to avoid. He is trying to avoid a blemish, the blemish that will always stain his reputation in this state, along with the Hon. Rob Lucas's and the Liberals', for all time, and that blemish is that they made a promise; they made a core promise to the community, they backtracked and they broke that promise. And into the future, no-one can be expected to take the Hon. Mr Brokenshire's, the Hon. Mr Lucas's, and the Liberal opposition's word for any value whatsoever.