Allwater Joint Venture

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (15:17): I seek leave to make an explanation prior to directing a question to the Minister for Water on the subject of the Allwater contract.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: On 16 October on ABC radio, David Bevan asked a series of questions to the minister about the Allwater contract. The transcription of the interview went as follows:

Mr Bevan: When's the contract expire?

Mr Hunter: I couldn't tell you…I don't have that figure in front of me.

Mr Bevan: Well, if you're actively considering it, you'd know, wouldn't you? That goes to how active you are.

Mr Hunter: No…if we make…

And then further on Mr Bevan says:

But if you're actively considering it you'd at least know when the contract is going to expire and you don't know that.

Mr Hunter: I don't know these operational matters. I don't keep it in in my head.

Mr Bevan: That's not an operational matter, that's…if you're actively considering this, if you want our listeners to seriously think…

Mr Hunter: I think the contract renewal date is pretty much an operational matter. I can find out for you in a very short time though and get back to you by asking someone.

Mr Bevan went on:

But if it was a year away you'd have to get your skates on, if you're serious about this.

Mr Hunter: Well we will be getting our skates on. This is our election policy and we will need to consider how we actually bring it back in. If we bring it back in just as the SA Water corporatised entity or do we bring it back as a bigger entity completely. We will have to look at the pros and cons of that…

In particular, I refer the minister to the question about the contract renewal date. He said that he could find out 'in a very short time' and get back to Mr Bevan 'by asking someone'. That question was asked on 16 October and I have asked similar questions since in the chamber. Can the minister now advise the chamber and, indeed, through the chamber, Mr Bevan and anyone else who is interested what is the contract renewal date of the Allwater contract?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (15:19): I cannot believe my luck. I thank the honourable member for his incredibly important question, another important question on just how fixated the Liberal Party in South Australia is on privatisation of SA Water, one of our key essential services.

I have already pointed out that the Liberals have misled the people of South Australia—no surprise there, it is what they do. I should say, they use severe terminological inexactitudes in what they intend to do, and it is something that we have been paying for ever since. As we know, and as the people of South Australia know, bills don't go down when a utility has been privatised, they go up. There is one person responsible for that in this chamber and that is the Hon. Mr Lucas. We know that he still has plans, which he drew up when he was last in government, to sell SA Water. We know it. It is in his blood. This is all of a piece. This is why they corporatised SA Water in the first place, because they knew that they could fatten up the calf for sale into the private markets.

We know that we need to stop the Liberals ever getting a chance to privatise SA Water again into the future because we know what happens when privatisation occurs. We know the impacts on our community. In fact, you don't have to listen to me make those claims, you can listen to the chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. He told people what happens when essential services are privatised—he told the world—and the Hon. Mr Lucas knew this when he was responsible for selling ETSA in the last Liberal government.

The Hon. Mr Lucas had reports at the time saying it would mean higher power prices for householders. What did he do? He ignored that advice, he argued with them, he pretended it wasn't accurate. He said, 'I have a different view,' and, 'I am taking separate advice—different advice.' Not only did he ignore the reports that the Liberals managed to make this a much worse deal than it otherwise would have been—and it is something, of course, only the Hon. Mr Lucas could manage in his inestimable way—the Liberals botched the sale of ETSA. They could not get the sale contract right and they needed to come back to parliament with legislation in this place to fix their contractual errors.

The Auditor-General has indeed questioned if the sale represented the best value for the state. The Auditor-General, Mr President. The Auditor-General also found the process led by Mr Lucas to be shoddy. The Auditor-General found that the process led by the Hon. Mr Lucas was shoddy.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! I ask the honourable minister's colleagues to allow him to give his answer in silence.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Even the Hon. Mr Lucas's colleagues said he botched it and one of his fellow travellers in the business sector, who wouldn't normally be considered to be a Labor supporter. I can quote from the Adelaide Advertiser in 2001. This is Mr Hugh Morgan, the managing director of mining giant—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Well, when did you privatise it? It states:

…the state's biggest power user [Western Mining] put the political cat among the pigeons on Wednesday by speaking out publicly over the ETSA privatisation process and blaming the Government—

the Liberal government at the time—

for power price rises because it wanted to secure a good price in the ETSA leasing deal.

So, the Hon. Mr Lucas and the Liberal government ignored all that advice so that it could get a good price in the ETSA leasing deal. We are acting on this side of parliament to make sure that the Hon. Mr Lucas never gets his chance again to privatise another asset, never gets his chance to get his hands on SA Water. We are acting because selling off essential services like electricity and water leaves the community worse off.

A re-elected Weatherill Labor government will establish the energy and water services department to bring together publicly owned water and electricity essential services and protect them from privatisation. This is a clear point of difference between the Labor and the Liberal Party that will give South Australians a clear choice at the next election. Water services provided by SA Water are highly valued by South Australians and the government is committed to keeping these services in public hands. Over the last four years, SA Water customers have seen a 6.5 per cent decrease in combined water and sewerage bills, which is the largest reduction for urban and residential customers out of the 13 similar sized water utilities across the country.

Since the introduction of independent regulation in 2013, the government has driven down the price on an average household water and sewerage bill by $171, including the remission of the Save the River Murray levy. We have delivered on our commitment to contain cost of living pressures for South Australians, because we have SA Water in public hands. What has happened with ETSA? There is the case in point that we draw an example from. The Liberals sold ETSA, and did prices go down? No, they did not—no, they did not.

This is the key difference between the Liberal Party of South Australia, the privatisers of essential utilities, and the Labor Party. Keeping SA Water in public hands will ensure this essential service continues to provide in the long-term best interests of South Australians rather than being driven by the financial considerations of big business and the Liberal Party.

These changes will bring together publicly owned essential services and protect them from privatisation, and we will provide a clear distinction to the voters of this state at the next election: those on this side who will protect these key public assets and bring water and our energy assets back into the hands of the public, unlike the Liberals, who just want to flog them off.

The PRESIDENT: I just let the council know that we have placed the crossbench up a bit higher on the ticket, so the opposition had five questions today, the crossbench had three and Labor had one.