<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2018-05-30" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="263" />
  <endPage num="299" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Fund My Neighbourhood</name>
      <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000195">
        <heading>Fund My Neighbourhood</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="5413" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. E.S. BOURKE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2018-05-30">
            <name>Fund My Neighbourhood</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2018-05-30T15:04:11" />
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000196">
          <timeStamp time="2018-05-30T15:04:11" />
          <by role="member" id="5413">The Hon. E.S. BOURKE (15:04):</by>  I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Treasurer a question.</text>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000197">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="5413" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. E.S. BOURKE</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <page num="275" />
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000198">
          <by role="member" id="5413">The Hon. E.S. BOURKE:</by>  The following is an extract from an email that was recently brought to my attention. The message was signed off by the acting executive director for government communications and engagement:</text>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000199">
          <inserted>Fund My Neighbourhood will not continue in 2018. Fund My Neighbourhood funding will be allocated to support commitments made by the new State Government that will improve South Australian communities.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text continued="true" id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000200">My question to the Treasurer is: does this statement correctly reflect the government's decision to cut round 2 of the fully funded Fund My Neighbourhood Program? If so, was it the Premier's decision or the Treasurer's decision to cut round 2 of this funding?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="605" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. R.I. LUCAS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Treasurer</electorate>
        <startTime time="2018-05-30T15:04:58" />
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000201">
          <timeStamp time="2018-05-30T15:04:58" />
          <by role="member" id="605">The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (15:04):</by>  The member's characterisation of the decision is entirely accurate, to use a phrase that I used earlier. This was a Labor program, one which we were not committed to. We made no commitment prior to the election to continue the $20 million stage 2 of Fund My Neighbourhood and, indeed, when asked, explicitly refused to do so. This was an example of the sort of programs and the waste that the former government sadly engaged in in a desperate but unfailing attempt to get re-elected prior to the last election. There was so much money being sloshed around the community by the former government—</text>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000202">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000203">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT</by>:  Order! Let the minister respond in silence.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="605" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.I. LUCAS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000204">
          <by role="member" id="605">The Hon. R.I. LUCAS:</by>  —whether it was money being thrown at companies who, when they received the $10 million, said they were coming to South Australia even if they didn't get the $10 million; whether it was the $2.7 million personal slush fund of the former Treasurer so that every Greek community, church or organisation in a marginal Labor seat or a seat that the Labor Party wanted to win could get a grant prior to the last election; or whether it was programs like Fund My Neighbourhood, where the Labor Party or the former Labor government threw $20 million at the community. They just threw $20 million at the community and said, 'Go on, pick whatever project you like. Whatever you want you can have, and the taxpayers of South Australia will pay for it.'</text>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000205">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000206">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT</by>:  Order!</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="605" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.I. LUCAS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20180530a78100c74a8f4d40a0000207">
          <by role="member" id="605">The Hon. R.I. LUCAS:</by>  'There is $20 million in the first round, if you want another $20 million in the second round...' It only happened in the period leading up to the state election, of course. This wasn't good policy; this was a desperate, failed attempt by the former Labor government at trying to get re-elected. It was a poor program, it was a poor use of resources and, when asked prior to the election, we unashamedly refused to give a commitment to wasting another $20 million on this particular program. Yes, it was stopped; it was a decision of the former Liberal Party opposition and now of the Marshall Liberal government. It was one made as Treasurer, that together, arm in arm and in lock step with the Premier and with my ministers, we are happy to defend and to support.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>